**CLOTHING**

"And if it's so, what's then the Beauty?
 Why do the people deify its mode?
Maybe it is the vessel with futility,
 Or it is fire twinkling in the vessel unfold?"
 Nikolai Zabolotskii
"A naked will pass through the field, and a hungry cannot move from the place" - the saying goes. Vladimir Ivanovich Dal wrote down the same proverb on the contrary and argues that the field to pass is easier to a hungry than an undressed. Two seemingly contradictory versions of sayings do not contradict each other; they reflect two sides of the same coin.
 Nowhere, as in clothing, so strongly and so clearly merged two human fundamentals: spiritual and material. This interpretation confirms countless words, one way or another, connected with the concept of clothing.
    The clothing in some dialects is still called "shell," dressing - "putting a shell"  "(in the modern Bulgarian language, "shell around" "also means the clothes). Putting a shell around you means to dress. These words sound somewhat unsteady, light, temporary, reminiscent of the transient beauty of the heavenly clouds. (Note, incidentally, that the winter weather in the northern cloudy days is warmer than the cloud-free.)
People's attitude to clothes has always implied a certain irony, a slight disdain expressed by words such as "junk," "cloak," "Whiskey," "rag." But this approach has only masked, served as the pretense of a quite serious and eternal concern about what to wear, how to protect themselves from the cold and rain, not standing out meanwhile with panache or squalor: that was considered equally outrageous.
That was the wholeness of people's attitude to clothing, which manifests itself in simplicity, in the sense of measure, economic accessibility, Beauty and diversity. But unfortunately, this integrity was gradually destroyed by the insolence of class and other influences resulting from fashion. The helplessness of the national folk custom to fashion is evident and started a long time ago.
Here's what wrote in 1790 one of the Russian journals, for example, on the buttons: "For ten years subsequent changes in the buttons were almost countless. How can we remember those changes? The order began with the introduction of the buttons instead of the so-called olives with brushes of a different type, followed small steel barrels, tiny steel buttons in the shape of asterisk, then appeared with sequins sewn on the matter, the buttons and afterward came the buttons with copper border in the middle with the same copper knob, a solid circle of the add was made like porcelain. After that appeared brass buttons like a bit of spine, and finally silk buttons and linen buttons of the same type.
Finally, a few take the time to service a nifty light of different race copper buttons reasonable sizes, which subsequently increased so that there was a good badge, and very likely that eventually came up to the size of his dining plate or to a furnace damper if not replaced by the add-used buttons with portraits, skates and octagonal buttons and curved shells."
 This tried to instill a sense of inferiority by all means to a peasant. Social class arrogance, alien to the people's spirit, never dozed, and parvenus always put on the "progressive,» most eye-catching clothing. Still, fashion victims with the brilliance of its buttons could not blind the inner eye of the national consciousness; the Beauty and practicality of traditional dress for a long time remained in the North. And only when the national traditions in clothing started to be seen as a sign of stagnation and backwardness began in no way curbed following fashion.
     Fashion, as we know, is a thing very capricious, inconstant, that does not recognize any reasons. The aesthetics of the peasant clothing in the Russian North was utterly dependent on national traditions, which, together with the national character, formed under the influence of climatic, economic and other conditions.
People's attitude to clothes has been characterized primarily by an amazing thrift. Everywhere was present a strong contrast between the working and everyday clothes (not to mention the difference between every day and holiday) as by cleanliness as by solidity of work and material. More careless, more irresponsible was a family or individual, less was this difference.
    An experienced and dishonest debater immediately would call all of this stinginess the desire for hoarding. But what is there to wonder? And should we all be surprised when the peasant lifts from the floor, a crust of bread, goes half a mile back into the woods to find forgotten mittens? It all really starts with the mittens. Remember what a difficult path goes the canvas shirt before it gets under the carpenter's belt.
    People from infancy are taught to be frugal. It would be an absolute disaster if you smear with mud for the new pants, lose a cap, or burn a hole in clothes sitting near the fire. Shirts on their chest tore up only the drunken fools. A three-piece suit in a peasant family was worn by two and sometimes three generations of men. A woman woollen costume also was worn by a daughter and sometimes a granddaughter. A shawl bought at the fair was passed from mother to daughter. If not, she had no daughter then to the next of kin. (Before her death, an old woman bestowed her estate, and in case of premature death, a woman would tell the detailed instructions to whom and what to send.)
Manufactured (not self-made) clothes were especially cherished. Linen, homespun clothes too, was not easy to make, but it was solid and accessible, so it was not be passed from generation to generation; it is like bread on the table was the first necessity.
 Summer men's work attire looked very simple, but it's not that "simplicity that sometimes is worse than theft," as the saying goes. Simplicity and lack of extra details for linen pants and shirts have reached the 20-the 30s of the XX century from deep Slavic antiquity. Physical labour and constant communication between man and nature did not allow to be introduced in everyday peasant clothing anything superfluous, pretentious. Only modest, simple embroidery on the collar and sleeves is permitted in such an outfit. The pants have only an edge and two or three buttons, made of sheep inter-vertebral disks. Sometimes pants were dyed with onion skins and blue dye, but they were often not dyed.
The farmer wears only underwear in hot weather, not girded, the baste-shoes worn on bare feet.
The baste-shoes and birth bark soles cannot be considered a sign of poverty alone. They were excellent working shoes. Their lightness and low cost balanced their relatively rapid wear. The baste-shoes did not interfere with boots and leather shoes but were a good help.
Even in the 30th of the XX century, it was possible to see this picture: people will visit in the baste-shoes, carrying their boots thrown over the shoulder, and only at the village they change the shoes. In the off-season, peasants wear a long woollen coat or caftan. You could pull over the hood in bad weather, for warmth was the balaclava.
A cap made of fur or felt, like felt boots, complemented peasant wardrobe in the fall and spring.
In winter, almost all wear sheepskin coats and jackets. When travelling, people would take along the oversized fur coat, which was not available in every home and often borrowed for the trip. Fur coats, sheepskin clothes were widespread. From the sheepskin were sewn coats, long coats, mittens, hats, and blankets. In vogue were male and female sheepskin vests, or soul-warmers with the heather chopsticks instead of buttons. The men's sheepskin pants were indispensable in the bitter cold, especially on the road. (But most they were needed in the Christmas holidays because all liked to walk like mummers but the most devout, even the elderly. Turned inside out these pants and vest instantly transformed a person.)
 A sash or belt was a compulsory part of the working man's clothes. A festive attire for an adult male consisted of the bright, often scarlet embroidered shirt with the woven belt, newly shined with tar boots and wool, although homespun trousers.
With the development of seasonal occupation, the peasant clothes became like the urban petty-bourgeois and artisan clothes. A significant influence on the clothes has always provided military and other uniforms. Military peaked caps, sailors caps, high-collared tunics, belts destroyed the folk traditions no less than foreign or class influences. The galife pants of the infamous French general, the jacket with the high-collar, came close to being implemented in a peasant household.
 But you cannot say that a peasant took only a bad one from the alien way of life. On the contrary, many things emulated were good in the clothing that did not interfere with the traditional general way of life. The desire for renewal, rejection of the standard, and uniformity emanate from people's inner lives. Another thing is that they did not always rule by the healthy people's taste, especially in times of general moral and economic decline. But even in such periods, when, as they say, "not to get fat, just to stay alive," even in those circumstances, the peasant fashion did not take ugly forms. The new times completely destroyed a thousand years of the moral and economic order in the sparse northern villages and towns that stepped in casually a fashion after a fashion.
To compete with the urban, working or middle-class people's clothes for the folk costumes was very difficult. But, to a clerk with the patent leather visor, with watch chains, with a broad, like the horse girth belt, such a dandy, generously giving away to young women candies, was impossible not to envy.
Yes, and a party official in the breeches struck the village beauties not only with the smell of cigarettes. And for a country boy, will it always be possible to stand up for himself? He willy-nilly had to save money for the peaked cap ... However, the cap quickly gave away the position and remained in the old man's possession. The so-called "kepi" was to replace it. Bachelors wore a cap with a bow, a brooch, and sometimes a field flower.
During the war, it was fashion instead of the cardboard insert in the cap of the bent flexible shingles, and then, in turn, went sieves. The cap after this took the form of a wheel, and during festive brawls, it sometimes rolled away along with the village ... Around the same time, guys began bending the boots - even the girls walked in boots with the tops upside down.
Samples of the national women costumes are still preserved here and there on the Pechora and Mezen and in the northeastern part of the Vologda region. Some of its elements moved to modern festive and everyday women's clothing in these places. But only some features… The most stable of them are decorative.
In many places in the North, women, and not only them, still love the bright, contrasting colours of clothing. But traditional homemade decorations (lace, stitch, etc.) are not well reconciled with the products of factory output. This incompatibility immediately manifests itself in bad taste. Mixing the two styles does not create a new style. The existence of tradition requires at least a minimum of its parts... A lowering of the minimum diminishes the very essence, the content of the tradition, followed by its mutation and complete disappearance. Good or bad, it is a different conversation. But this is what happened to the Russian northern female costume. To verify this, you should imagine a peasant woman's dress beginning in the XX century. It was based on a shirt and a sarafan. We must not forget that all clothing, except the top, sewn especially by tailors, has been made a woman herself, as she spun woven, knitted and embroidered. Therefore, having a sense of proportionality and Beauty and being personally interested, she has often created a consistent, highly creative and, of course, individual costume. A woman with less artistic flair (regardless of wealth) created a less expressive, unlike the other outfit, and girls and women without much talent inevitably imitated the first two.
The tradition took shape from such following, so it can be called a public expression of aesthetic intuition, a kind of fixative of high taste, good manners, and good skills. The tradition did not allow to do worse than expected. It hedged, served as the tolerance limit, below which quality will go down. Therefore, it could only be perfected. Any other movements work for the tradition's destruction, chaos, and aesthetic haze in which such suggestiveness wanders the will -o the wisp lights. Clearly, thanks to the convention, the girl making the dress could not arbitrarily shorten or lengthen it or sew it too broad (excess weight and waste of canvas), as useless to make it too narrow. But she could embroider the collar, make the sleeve with frills and decorate the hem with stitch and lace. It was in accord with a centuries-old tradition and agreed with the whimsical and imaginative.
The tradition, while guarding against the ugliness, liberates creativity. Shirts are sewed with a high-neck collar and wide sleeves. With the advent of printed calico, women began to sew dresses in which a calico part was sewn to the top of a canvas part. In hot weather, women worked on the field wearing body-long shirts only. Russian countrywomen in the North did not know the tights and bras until the thirties. This may seem absurd, given that the snow stays here six months a year. But, first, the woman did not bring logs from the forest and did not climb among snowdrifts with axes. It was the work of men.
Secondly, the principle of the bell shape in the clothing did not allow feeling cold in the most severe frosts. Such clothing is almost ankle length and gradually narrowing to the top. The sundresses, fur coats, the Russian military overcoat also used this principle. Under the "bell," heat is kept at the level of ankles. The boundary of the cold was just on the tops of felt footwear. Naturally, such a costume was working out in the girl, and then the woman took a careful approach to the movements and disciplined behaviour. She had to think twice before somewhere to take a step or jump. This circumstance affected the development of a unique feminine gait, manifested in a restrained and dignified women's dance. Over the shirt, the woman wore a wool sarafan; its top edge was above the breast and was kept on the armpit level. The sarafan was wrapped around the waist with a woven belt; it was worn without a belt, especially in warm weather. The skirt is different from sarafan in that it was not maintained at the armpit level but at the waist, for it was woven a special patterned, relief, often woollen cloth. The skirt and the jacket made a pair. Probably they came from a petite bourgeoisie or a merchant environment. The sack came from the same background, outerwear replacing the fur coat.
A sack custom made with the frills was called the three-stitches. Clothes for girls and even for a guy meant a lot, sometimes they did not sleep at night earning money, did extra work to save for the fancy clothes. So many people hesitated to go out before getting a female double-piece or male three-piece costume.
The half-coat for the boys (the top jacket) and the sack for a girl were very important. Not in vain, among others, there is this limerick:
"We were born ugly. We live poor.
 At the merry party, we are not looking pretty sure".

 As you can see, clothing is in the same logical row as physical Beauty. Another limerick betrays the idea of social inferiority of under-dressed people, their vulnerability to rumours.
"They say I have no decent clothes,
- But I just buy all the time:
 a tartan skirt, a flared skirt, what kind of dress,
«goblin," you want from me?"

 The traditional attitude to clothes is still felt in this unpretentious little song because after walks or walking to the church, clothes always were hung, aired and put in a closet. Recent developments, however, sound stronger: girls who wore the flared skirts were already advanced and did not hesitate to not only rhyme with "goblin" but even with stronger expressions.
During the twenties, a co-ed life in barracks taught girls to wear men's hats and quilted trousers. Working in the woods on horses trained them of strong words and manners. And yet, going on all winter for lumber-jacking many girls took at least one festive attire.
In the winter evenings in the barracks, some slept, some cooked, and some danced to the accordion. The more fragile life is, the less is the difference between everyday and festive clothing. Life of young people in the lumber camps, war, post-war hard times, and nomadic recruiting disorder negated the well-defined border between the weekends and everyday attire.
 Once upon a time, in sloppy, dirty or torn clothes danced only fools, profligate and drunken buffoons, and there was a definite focus for the fun and banter. During the hard times, such introduction to the dance circle, first as a comic, became usual and drunken dancers stopped being laughing-stock. Ribald limerick from women, dressed in men's work trousers and jacket, sounds less disgusting than pretty and fashionably dressed women. Moreover, a nicely dressed woman, perhaps, did not want to clown ...
Women's shoes in the old days did not have much variety, the identical boots girls wore in the field and to go out. Only exceptionally skilled shoemakers sewed women's shoes. During the XIX century, in families where men went away to seasonal work, wives or sisters began to wear high shoes/ elegant footwear.
Despite all odds, shawls and woven lace scarves remained the prominent women's headdress, so either hats during the New Economic Policy years or berets during the thirties failed to dislodge them. Rich and fashionable were considered women in a pre-revolutionary peasant village, which had the muff (which keeps her hands "Unknown" of Kramskoy). High shoes, two-part costumes, cashmere scarfs are considered a mandatory addition to the entire dowry of the bride.
As soon as the child starts to crawl and then walks along the bench, mother, sister, or grandmother sewed their clothes, preferably not from the new, but out of old, soft and wear-out clothes. The style of child clothes entirely depended on the whims of a master. But most often, the children's clothing and shoes echoed adults. The child, dressed as an adult with accuracy to the smallest detail, evokes a sense of comic tenderness.
But the fact of the matter is that the peasant family will never be too sugary with the children. Protecting children from overwork and gradually increasing the physical and moral responsibilities the parents simultaneously were with children serious and unambiguous. Like adults' clothes, the same tools (e.g., a small hatchet, a small shovel, a small cart) made the child an immediate and equal participant in everyday peasant life. Self-esteem and a serious attitude toward the world were established in early childhood, but this did not interfere with children's naivety and spontaneity. On the contrary, this opens additional opportunities for a child's imagination. Dressed as an adult, a child tries to live as an adult.
Overcoming the feeling of envy for an older child who has received the new clothes, he extinguishes a spark of selfishness in his heart. And of course, they learn to enjoy the gift, getting used to a careful, loving attitude to clothes.
 In large families, new clothes were bought or made not very often. Clothing (less often shoes) passed from older to younger. To wear older siblings' clothing was considered in the peasant family a simple necessity. Things that were not needed were necessarily given away to the poor. Considered a sin to throw away as well as buy extra.