[HPforGrownups] Robes and other Clothing

[GulPlum]

No: HPFGUIDX 45763

Eloise wrote:

<snip>

>Bluecoat Schools (http://home.freeuk.com/mkb/SUG/Blcoat.htm)

I'd just like to point out that they're called Blue *coats* for a 
reason.:-) The difference (as I see it) between the Bluecoats and the 
Hogwarts robes is that the coat is only buttoned to the waist; what's below 
it (breeches, long socks) is designed to be visible, although I'm curious 
what's beneath the coat at chest height (in one of the pictures, one of the 
boys is sitting in such a way that he's showing something white underneath, 
which I assume to be a shirt). I must admit at this stage that although I'd 
heard of Bluecoat schools, I didn't know they were still around, nor that 
they still wear this kind of uniform. As they say, you learn something new 
every day, sometimes in the most unlikely of places. :-)

>Someone on this site once quoted the reason for the film's change to
>(academic) gowns over school uniform being to do with the fact that all those
>plain black work robes would result in a sea of black which would not worked
>cinematically. Sorry, I can't remember who or when and I don't feel like
>confronting Yahoomort today!

I have a vague recollection of several quotes to that extent from Judianna 
Makovsky (costume designer) in articles about the first film. I'm not sure 
whether or not to read anything into the fact that she wasn't employed for 
the second one. :-)

That said, I'm not entirely sure that it's a valid comment anyway, 
considering a lot of the time, the kids are seen en masse wearing the capes 
rather than the uniforms, and given Columbus's penchant for ultra-close 
shots on faces, the whole thing becomes unimportant. I wouldn't be 
surprised if it was done with one eye on the marketing potential (not that 
this has been tapped with the official merchandise!)...

A few comments on what other people have said, without quotes.

A few people have made reference to the Weasley kids wearing Muggle clothes 
while at home. I'm not making accusations, but I can't find anything to 
support it in the books. Anyone care to supply a quote? :-) Bill, of 
course, is a case apart as what he wears "wouldn't be out of place at a 
rock concert", but that's not the same thing. If what the kids wear is so 
"normal" (to Muggle eyes), why is Arthur's getup so outlandish when he sets 
off for the QWC?

A similar comment goes for whether or not Muggle clothes are routinely worn 
at Hogwarts. I can think of only two canon mentions of Muggle clothing, 
namely Harry's t-shirt under his Quidditch robes and the Weasley Christmas 
Jumpers.

As I said at the start of this conversation, we have no canonical 
description of what wizards routinely wear underneath their robes, although 
that Archie at the QWC chooses to "go commando" is presented as strange. 
But whether what's under the robes goes beyond underwear, we simply don't 
know. The fact that Harry wears a t-shirt under his Quidditch robes is 
therefore completely normal. The implication, however, is that he has 
nothing *else* (i.e. a shirt) on.

Please note that I'm not saying that trousers and shirts are unknown, or 
even uncommon, in the wizarding world. On the contrary, we know that Hagrid 
wears a jerkin, and considers his hairy suit the height of fashion. For 
starters, considering his job, wearing robes would be impractical, and his 
giant heritage probably doesn't include robes anyway.

Depending on how one pictures clothes at Hogwarts, it's possible (perhaps 
even likely), that shirts and trousers are worn under the robes. However, 
it is the *robes* that form the uniform (i.e. are all the same), not what's 
worn underneath them, as that isn't meant to be seen by others. I expect 
that wizards without robes simply don't consider themselves "fully dressed" 
( a bit like clerics a generation or two ago), so whilst it might be 
acceptable for the Weasleys to wear their Christmas Jumpers in private, I'm 
not sure whether they'd wear them in public. It's interesting that Percy 
refuses to wear his: being a stickler for formality, he'd probably consider 
it a bit... rude.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who wonders if this talk of underwear is getting a bit 
kinky, and will reply to Steve (bboy_mn)'s Lord of the Flies post later 
this evening...