What is the definition of a tunic? - YouLookFab Forum

Category

Dressing

What is the definition of a tunic?

catgirl

Veteran

Suz's post raised this issue for me. She mentioned she felt her tunic could be shorter, whereas I felt it was at the short end of the tunic spectrum already. My tunics (or what I call tunics) are ALMOST long enough to be a mini-dress on me, like the Joie sweaters. I see that the model for it is 5'11"! 10 inches taller than yours truly.

So what exactly IS a tunic?

Dressing

29 replies

Latest reply was from unfrumped

FlorenceFearne

I'd love to hear what anyone else has to say about this, because I wear my very short skater dresses as tunics all through the cold season over leggings and skirts. Or maybe I don't, and I'm actually just wearing dresses over leggings and skirts, and I didn't realize it.

Diana

Veteran

Hmm, I think it definitely has to cover the entire crotch point and butt. I.e. you could wear it with leggings (which are NOT pants!) and be decent. But in my head it would not be decent to wear it with bare legs. So maybe the longest would be mid thigh? I realize that others might find this a perfectly fine length for a dress... But not me.

I have to admit sometimes I look for tunics in the dress section... And I do often wear dresses like tunics, with pants or leggings underneath.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

Oh - I agree that my sweater only borders on being a tunic on the short side. I just meant that the long side was a bit long for me. Not for a tunic. But you see...I don't think I look very good in tunics.

I think part of it is leg shape, Una. Yours are slender, mine are not. This affects how the tunic length looks. I think I look even shorter in a tunic whereas you look taller than your actual height. Perhaps the *right* tunic wouldn't make me look that way. Or a column of colour -- that would also help. I am working on that one.

catgirl

Veteran

Interesting, Suz. I think any leg slenderness actually works against me with my IT shape in tunics, so I try to balance with chunky boots. But I've also realized how much the asymmetrical hem makes a difference - it's much more flattering as it throws off the horizontal aspect. In fact, I'm thinking diagonal lines are the most flattering of all for me!

I do love your tunic on you, whatever you choose to call it!

Mo

(website)

Veteran

The only tunics I have are dresses that are too short to wear on their own like Diana describes. I do have one long shirt, but it's just under the butt cheek, so I don't think it's even long enough to be a tunic?

Suz

(website)

Veteran

Diagonal lines are awesome, Una. They work for me, too. That is where our styles meet and embrace in a UWP/ Urban Prince love-fest. Oh, and if I could I would also have blue hair. I am considering fuchsia at some point.

Echo

Veteran

For me, a tunic hits at the crotch point down to mid thigh. Like others have said, I typically wear them shorter than I would ever wear a dress, but long enough to cover the bum if I am going to wear them with ponte pants or leggings.

CocoLion

(website)

Veteran

A tunic covers your butt from just below it to a few inches lower, like 4".

I don't find they work on me, they draw attention to my ice cream cone legs, and tend to end at their fullest point. Although true an uneven hemline can work, just as an open cardigan that is tunic length, can break up the strong horizontal line.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

That's it exactly, Denise. You and me both. Well, I don't see your legs as an issue...and mine are not so slender on the bottoms...but the basic issue is the same. They hit at the widest point and then the legs end up looking stumpy somehow. Whereas on ITs like Una, this does not happen because the widest point is the shoulder.

What I don't get is that my widest point technically is my shoulder, too -- it just doesn't look like that.

I think I can borderline get away with the new sweater and can manage some that are just crotch point (so not true tunics) but it is tricky.

karymk

Veteran

A tunic to me is unflattering religious garb. I've got a couple of cool ones from the middleeast that I pull out when I need "boho". Which isn't often!

Janet

(website)

Veteran

Ditto exactly to Denise. I hate tunics on me. Yuck yuck yuck. I keep trying them and they always make me look thick and stumpy because they cut across my saddlebags -- my widest part. Unless... there is a slant to the hem. I love asymmetrical and high-low hems for this very reason.

Mo

(website)

Veteran

I go longer than that awful spot Denise and Janet mentioned.
For instance, this top I purged. Did not like how blocky it made me look, and the length is at that horrible widest part of my bottom half. But isn't this too short to be a tunic?

This post has 1 photo. Photos uploaded by this member are only visible to other logged in members.

If you aren't a member, but would like to participate, please consider signing up. It only takes a minute and we'd love to have you.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

Mo, I think it's sort of borderline. Probaby a few inches longer would be a true tunic. But that would still be hitting at a wide point.

The other issue, for me (and probably for you and Denise, too, but less for Janet) is that tunics or crotch length tops (like the one here) cut me in half. So while I can get away with them at times, and they look okay if the contrast is low, with high contrast it's a proportion issue.

Anonymous

Hmmm, yes, a tunic is probably a bit longer than Mo's top. I think in the 80's they were all at least mid-thigh.

One of my sisters, whose legs are even thinner than mine (painfully thin looking) wore leggings with a "big shirt" over them for years. I never thought it was a good look, because the shirt ended in an unflattering spot on her thigh--which is not always the widest spot, it can also be the narrowest spot if your legs are thin. For me, finding the "sweet spot" is more important than getting the 2/3 or 1/3 proportions correct. I was just thinking about it the other day. I want to minimize and draw attention away from my tummy area, but just below it, I have a good spot, and that's where I like to draw a horizontal line (by having my top or blazer end there).

rae

(website)

Veteran

I would just call Mo's a long top. I feel a tunic would have to be longer than the crotch point. I guess I'm envisioning the historical tunics and thinking a tunic should at least be long enough to cover man parts (if it were worn by a man).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunic

I have similar issues with length as Denise and Janet, but as long as it's higher or lower than the wide part of ye olde saddlebags, I'm ok. I guess it helps that my saddlebags are right below my hips. Recently, I'm liking them a lot with a shorter jacket over the top.

This post has 2 photos. Photos uploaded by this member are only visible to other logged in members.

If you aren't a member, but would like to participate, please consider signing up. It only takes a minute and we'd love to have you.

ramya

Veteran

Kurtis or kurtas are my version of tunic:)
So anything mid thigh to just above knee in my head

El Cee

Veteran

My own personal definition of a tunic is a top that hits at the tip of my fingertips (or below) when my arms lay straight at my sides. This length allows for coverage of crotch and butt.

bella

(website)

Veteran

Another pretty pear here who abhors tunics. I like the idea of them, seem so practical to throw over a pair of leggings, but I don't look good in them AT ALL.

Anonymous

Racey Rectangle checking in. Tunics (mid thigh to just above the knee and somewhat loose rather than form fitting) are really difficult because of the boxy shape they create. The assymetrical hem on Suz's top would solve that problem.

Anonymous

Like a lot of people have mentioned, I consider tunics anything that goes past the crotch and covers the butt, but isn't long enough to be a dress.

As a petite pear, I should probably stay far away from them, but I wear them anyway because they're so easy and comfortable. It's hard to find ones that work on me but, when I find them, I pretty much wear them out!

RoseandJoan

Veteran

I think of Romans and the Ancient Greeks when I think of tunics, in modern terms a garment cut from a simple pattern which falls between mid thigh and the ankle.

viva

Veteran

I think Rae has illustrated why tunics remain a part of fashion for some women. Perfectly styled and gorgeous.

ironkurtin

Veteran

Didn't Robin Hood wear a tunic? With tights?

Aziraphale

Veteran

I guess I'd say that a tunic is any garment that is long enough to totally obscure your crotch, but not long enough to reasonably be worn as a dress, even by a 20-year-old with blemish-free legs.

If they go in too much at the waist, though, they don't look so much like a tunic as a really, really short dress -- like an ice skater's outfit.

Janet

(website)

Veteran

I would argue that many garments that are marketed as "dresses" are in reality, tunics.

But that's the perspective of someone who wanders the dress departments, muttering about %$&# designers who won't cut a darn dress to cover the knees of a long-legged woman who is only just slightly taller than average. :-/

Anonymous

ROTFL @Janet. Me too! My legs aren't long, but my knees must be really close to the ground, because I can't find a dress that will cover them easily. Every dress is a tunic on me.

ManidipaM

Veteran

Below crotch to just above knee is my definition generally though a vented tunic like our long side-slit kameez might go almost to the ankle. Similarly, an asymmetrical hemline could be right up at the waist where shortest.

carambola

Veteran

I have the same definition in my head as many others here (covering the crotch point, etc.), but the marketing of these things is completely confusing.

There's this: http://www.garnethill.com/cash.....you/170521 , which looks like just a regular sweater to me. (I have the grey on order and am hoping it works as a cozy basic sweater.)

But then also this: http://www.bodenusa.com/en-US/.....Tunic.html, which is called a tunic, but would make a perfectly acceptable dress for someone petite. Oddly, it is being modeled as a dress despite being categorized under 'Tops and T-shirts'.

unfrumped

Veteran

Agree with rear-covering at a minimum.

I'm really intrigued by the reminders of the benefits of asymmetrical hems.

I don't think tunics are good on me but if I wear a more fitted, tapered pant I usually need a longer top, maybe the longest version version of what still is a "top." But, then they create the dreaded horizontal low hip line. And same if add a layering cardigan, sometimes despite leaving the bottom unbuttoned.

I have one cardigan which is more cutaway in front to create a strong V at the bottom and has potential to be more flattering.

Hmm, food for thought....