Azure and Bleu Celeste

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
04 November 2012 01:08
 

Watching college football this evening, I noticed that my alma mater, UCLA (Go Bruins!) were wearing new jersys.  For as long as I can remember, their jerseys for Home games have been light blue, essentially Bleu Celeste, with gold numbers outlined (fimbrated in our jargon) in black; in contrast to UC Berkeley’s dark blue jerseys.  I suspect (but don’t really know) that the intent was to parallel Oxford & Cambridge practice.

This evening, however, UCLA was wearing dark blue jerseys with light blue numbers (fimbrated in gold)—and I was impressed with how well it worked—even at relatively small scale or long distance, i.e. on the TV screen—the numbers were quite distinct & easy to read.

 

Brother Carrasco, a fellow Bruin, may be able to explain why the change, & whether it is permanent or just a temporary throw-back to some earlier UCLA practice (I noticed that the coaches & fans were still wearing the light blue).

 

For our purposes here, however, I thought it relevant to the acceptability of, or scepticism towards, Blue Celests as a heraldic tincture distinct from Azure; particularly when combined in the same arms (but in this case fimbrated—don’t know how well it would have worked visually without that).  Of course in this case the Azure was a dark blue, and the light blue was, well, light…

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
04 November 2012 08:17
 

No! Stop that right now!

This is all about Nike and other sponsors having more crap to market. That’s why all these schools whose colors are green and yellow are out playing in black, gray, and desert camouflage gear. That and the fact that athletic directors can’t say no to 19 year olds who think it all looks scary and cool.

 

Real teams wear their school colors. Real teams wear the same uniform decade after decade.

 

Coach and quarterback, 1961.

http://www.secsportsfan.com/images/pat-trammell.jpg

 

Coach and quarterback, 2012.

http://dy.snimg.com/story-image/6/51/4284832/125800-330-0.jpg

 

Here’s what an Alabama throwback uniform would look like, from 1930 (Johnny Cain, #14):

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/884/940/JohnnyCain_display_image_display_image.jpg?1303584990

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
04 November 2012 11:25
 

To make my reply more heraldic:

I would say that team and school colors should not be thought of in terms of the heraldic tinctures on a coat of arms—where by rights bleu celeste and azure should be the same thing.  (Some herald from the 16th century plus/minus described "azure" as the color of the sky on a bright clear day, and if that’s true, what is bleu celeste but another term for azure?)

 

Instead, they are really livery colors, as that term was originally used.  That is, the color of the clothing worn by people in the service of a great magnate, usually also reflected in his standard.  Confusion between the concept of heraldic tinctures and livery colors is how such things as murrey and tenny crept into coats of arms—they were colors of cloth used for servants’ uniforms.  At the same time that heralds were saying that gules is gules, tailors were making up livery suits in dull cherry, claret, sanguine, murrey, scarlet, crimson, etc.  The livery colors did not necessarily have anything to do with the tinctures of the arms.  The Tudor liveries were green and white, but the family arms were Gules, Argent, and Ermine.  The livery of the Percy earls of Northumberland was russet, yellow, and tawny.  And the coach of the Northumberland melee team couldn’t just take it into his head one day that it would make a nice change to swith to bright red, metallic gold, and dark brown.

 

So I say, if your [livery] colors are sky blue and gold, then wear sky blue and gold.  A little black or white fimbriation is acceptable.

 
j.carrasco
 
Avatar
 
 
j.carrasco
Total Posts:  639
Joined  20-04-2011
 
 
 
04 November 2012 15:11
 

Yes, the alternate uniforms were just a temporary thing (perhaps just a one time thing).  They wanted something to honor all of the championships and athletic success of the past while having a successful football team in the present.  You can read a tiny article about them here http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles/ucla/post/_/id/12363/ucla-to-wear-alternate-uniform-saturday

It was a very big weekend at UCLA (Homecoming, Parent’s Weekend, the re-opening of Pauley Pavilion) so I think the university wanted something that stood out and celebrated everything.  I didn’t like them at first but I really grew to like by the end of the game.  For an alternate uniform, they’re so much better than anything Oregon has put out (and even the new Notre Dame uniforms from earlier this season).  They still look like our regular uniforms but are updated a little.

 
liongam
 
Avatar
 
 
liongam
Total Posts:  343
Joined  19-02-2006
 
 
 
05 November 2012 03:37
 

Joseph is quite right in that change of sports kit by professional teams is more a question of marketing in order make the maximum turnover/profit from the merchandising of all manner of things from a club’s shop and the licensing of products elsewhere.  Football teams here in the UK tend to change their kit with alacrity even within a season.  No longer do teams have one kit for ‘home’ and ‘away’ games.  This, of course, is a cynical point of view, but I am afraid to say that UK football teams and sports bank untold millions from such blatant merchandising which is generally aimed at young fans as they will always want to have the most up to date kit to wear in order to support their team.

Now back to heraldry.  Again, Joseph is correct in that livery colours need not follow the principal metal and colour as used in the arms of an individual.  Although so saying most armigers would default to the principal metal and colour of their arms.  I believe, I am correct in saying that in the UK the only bar to an individual who had liveried servants was that they could not use red (scarlet or other bright red) as this was reserved as the Royal livery as it is still today.  If this were the case such individuals dressed their servants in a livery of chocolate, cherry, murrey or other dark ‘red’ or, perhaps, even tenne.

 

Regarding the status of tinctures.  Any colour used in heraldry such that cited ‘azure’ as long as it is ‘blue’ any shade will suffice, although generally most heraldic artists would probably use a range from a ‘mid’ blue to a dark blue.  The only qualification to this is the use of ‘bleu celeste’ which distinctly seen to be ‘sky blue’.  In British heraldry, bleu celeste is often employed in the arms of individuals who had served in the Royal Air Force, in general aviation or corporations who involved in the aviation industry, although not exclusively.

 

John

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
08 November 2012 12:02
 

Not at all surprised by the nature—and intensity!—of Joe’s responses, which by now are as traditional as the views he espouses. smile

His logic, as usual, is quite sound; but in this case I’m more open than usual to the English heralds, who treat Azure & Bleu Celeste as two distinct heraldic colors.  Not because it works in theory—I agree that it really doesn’t—but because it so clearly does work in practice, if the artist (or tailor) has the sense to make it work.

 

But then if we always agreed on everything, we wouldn’t both need to be here!

 
ninest123
 
Avatar
 
 
ninest123
Total Posts:  1703
Joined  29-06-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2022 00:19