Cutting trousers- a cultural divide

We've been discussing trousers on the T&C forum & it occurred to me that I haven't really looked at trousers on my blog. Largely because I feel that there is a lot less room for individual expression and nuance in trousers than in jackets, which I, of all people, should know is not really true. I explain.

Working in the RTW industry in Canada gives me an interesting perspective in that I sell garments in Canada, the United States, and sometimes central America, Europe and Asia; regional variations in taste and fit are more obvious to me than someone who only sells into one market. But let me focus on Canada and the U.S. who share a similar history and culture but have very distinct tastes in trousers. I can sell basically the same cut of jacket into the States as I do in Canada, though generally a little easier in the U.S., but the trousers are a deal-breaker. It has always been a basic truth in our trade that (despite the fashion cutomer whose preferences bounce around quite a bit) Americans like a big, roomy, pleated, high-waisted trouser and Canadian prefer the opposite, namely a trim, plain-front, low-rise trouser. We had some leftover suits hanging in stock that had been cut for the States and no matter what kind of promotional price we might offer in order to get rid of them here, nobody wanted to touch a pleated, easy trouser so we had to cut them down to slimmer, plain front versions in order to liquidate them in Canada. A major expense (and royal pain) but we had to do it.

The British and the Neapolitans have different cultures and sartorial traditions so it is understandable that their preferences in cut should differ, but why would we find such a disparity between Canada and the U.S.? I've never really thought much about it until now.

Which brings me back to my next project. Bigger, easier trousers are more forgiving in their fit and require a bit less shaping in order to get a good fit; close-fitting trousers, like those that I cut for myself, need a bit more help. I just got a nice, sturdy piece of English cloth from which I'm going to make a suit and we'll look a bit at the shaping that goes into a traditionally-made trouser. Some of it is at construction level, but the shaping that I do in pressing can be used by anyone who is pressing their trousers at home to refine the fit a bit.

My next suit- a navy twill with a soft pink stripe.



Having typed this, I wandered over to T&C to see that Sator had posted this article on shaping the trousers. which saves me the work of having to illustrate it. I don't have much to add except that in a factory setting in order to control the amount of stretching and shrinking, we shift the knee notch up by 1/4" to 3/8" on the back panel- this has the effect of introducing fullness into the calf area and shortness in the back of the thigh. When we press the seams open and crease the trouser we then stretch the back thigh and front calf, eliminating any ripples of fullness in the seam and doing the same shaping.

The waistband should also be shaped, which is not illustrated so I will do that. To allow for that shaping, we ease some fullness on the front panels onto the waistband when sewing it on ( which is alluded to in the German text).

So here's a bit of a recap of the German text on ironwork, but with an explanation of WHY we are doing it. Note that normally I construct the fly before joining the front to the back but it would be difficult to see the result of the shaping so I am putting them together in the wrong order for the sake of this demonstration.

When the two panels are creased along their center line and placed next to each other, we see a gap at the thigh and the knee. Trousers which are narrower at the knee will have a greater gap and require more shaping than ones which are a little looser, as will trousers which are cut closer at the thigh. These are not really flared bottom trousers- the camera distortion makes it look like that.



If we shift the back panel to meet the front as if the seams were joined, we can see the excess length this creates at the back of the trouser, which often puddles around the wearer (not to be confused with a garment which has not been cut properly for forward hip posture, which will also puddle around the calves)



To make up for this extra length in the back we will use a combination of stretching the seam around the thigh and the knee, and shrinking a bit of the length out at the back. As David rightly pointed out in the T&C discussion, the trouser is subject to strain during wear so some shaping is bound to be lost- this is true of some of the shrinking so I prefer to do more stretching than shrinking. Notice the stripe line in the back panel.



The panels are then joined and the back of the calf given some additional shaping.



Here is the waistband which has been pressed into a curve to conform better to the waistline. Lower-waisted trousers need more shaping than higher-waisted ones.