Weavers Thoughts / Dissertation Topic.

1.  The Industrial Revolution in the USA has been squashed by the sending of all our industries overseas. If we are to become the leader of the world again, we need to become the industrial leaders again. 2.  Weaving today is viewed only as a hobby. I am trying to make a business out of it for when I retire. Only a few people understand a handmade piece(Those who also handcraft) and most can't comprehend why the prices are so high. 3.  We, you and I, haven't lost, but have found the real meaning of hand-loom weaving. Since I found my loom and began weaving, I have found relaxation and  stress relief in weaving. I am very excited about a weaving business. 4.  The  word " craft" to me, means something someone does just for fun, not very imaginative, anyone can do. Most "craft" products are pre-cut, just follow the instrutions and glue. What we do is artistic, one of a kind, handmade, not pre-cut. I put a lot of "me" into my rugs. Maybe that's what makes what we do different than a "craft project". We make "art".  5.  I have a Glimakra. Hasn't really changed in design for over a hundred or more years. 6.  We need to bring back the skills from the 19th and 20th century. Weaving looms haven't changed much in the past 200 years. Knitting and crochet neddles haven't changed either. Handmade still needs to be "handmade". I believe we need to revive and teach the old skills to younger generation before it dies..........Steve

Yes.

I have given a lot of thought to the very questions you ask over the years, and would like to respond with some thought. I believe these questions are more complex than people generally assume. I dislike composing online. I will compose offline and send you private message or email via Weavolution.

Will also get back to you - that first one is so often discussed, and yet I have a lecture presentation titles "Industrialization of Textiles Before the 'Industrial Revolution'" - indicating that the basis forr your questions is perhaps skewed toward modern thinking that developed in mid 19th century European romanticism. Industrial weaving didn't just start wiith popwer looms.

1. As I'm coming neither from the US nor the UK, I will (mostly) skip this question ;-)  Agreeing with Sara, the question is not easy. Here (in Sweden) there was lots of "industrial" weaving going on before mills were built. There was also some specialization among "home weavers" (according to Grenander, among others) - along the lines of Mrs A weaving the more complex patterns for the whole village, being "paid" in (say)  bedsheets, vadmal etc.

2. Weaving today - I see two different tracks: (for the lack of a better word) "romantics" who are mostly interested in "traditional" weaving (whatever that means - I often am accused of being too NON-traditional). The big number of these weavers tend to follow printed patterns. The other track is the weavers who explore structures, materials etc. (And then there is the third track: those who want to make copies of old-ish textiles, mistakes and all)

3. What we have lost. We have lost the idea of efficiency. Today it is ok to spend weeks on weaving a towel, quite often because we don't know (are interested in) how to work efficiently.

3,5. What we have gained: a modern weaver often know more about weave structures (or bindings, as Burnham calls them). Weaving miles of (say) bed sheets will no doubt make you an expert in weaving bedsheets, but you don't get to (or HAVE to) understand how (say) overshot works. We have so many more choices (yarn types, colours etc) - and that pushes us towards designing.

4. "craft"  Here in Sweden we have one easy definition: if it can be "used" (clothing, table napery...) it is craft (and has a VAT of 25%). If it is "art" (no VAT) it can't be of use (pottery example: a teacup with a hole in the bottom - textile example (not tested all the way): a shirt with the sleeves closed, so it can't be worn).

5. Loom technology: in (about) 1800, the family Ekenmark introduced the drawloom as we know it today (again: here in Sweden - the idea was of course known a very long time before, possibly even here). The basic loom (and the base for the drawloom) looks the same as "always". There are a few looms from the 1700s in Swe museums, looking exactly as the modern Glimåkras.

6. -

7. There is this idea that you can't LEARN craft, unless you have a "master" to observe. "It (the craft in question) can't be expressed in words". To me that indicates that the "master" has not really reflected on the process(es)... I believe that self-studies (with lots of reflection!) can be as valid.

Dear warpandweftare-

I too, would like to ponder this more. And I hope once everyone gets their answers written, they will post here, because I would certainly like to hear what others think about your great questions!

While waiting for everyone to get back to you, please check out this previous forum post on Weavolution (perhaps you missed it? Relates to your Q#4). There is a link to a podcast you will find interesting between an artist and craftsperson. I am still considering the points made by these two well-spoken individuals.

weavolution.com/forum/chat/name-check-weavolution-18254

From that BBC podcast, one key prediction made by Richard Sennett (BTW, he wrote The Craftsman, which you should also consider reading.) is social networking is reworking a lot of areas of the craft world. He opined that we haven't even begun to tap the community potential of these networks yet, because so far it's been "all about me" — everyone is still pretty busy tooting their own horn with YouTube uploads, blogs, facebook, etc. (IMHO, I think we are finally beginning to see this potential at sites like Weavolution! ;-)

Also, have you read "Factory Girls" by Leslie T Chang? (Q #1) It takes place in the present, modern day China, where they are going through an industrial revolution much like America did in the 1800's. I was struck by the similarities in stories between the girls coming from the countryside in Lowell, MA and those in China today. As a woman, there are additional cultural issues involved, both back then and today, that might interest you. So this is not something that happened in the dusty past, it's going on NOW.

There is a book about the 150+ year history of the Boott Cotton Mill in Lowell, MA that I am sure you can find online. One of the long-running problems in the decline of that particular mill was the investors were never willing to put money into the infrastructure. They were constantly looking for ways to make money with short-term efficiency methods and labor concessions. (And that sounds a lot like what is going on with many of our industries today...)

I am surprised we keep repeating this story over and over again when it comes to textiles, no matter how much we automate the process to reduce costs. We haven't figured out a better ending yet, have we? In America, it went from New England industries employing farm girls, to newly arrived immigrant groups for ever cheaper labor. Then it moved to the southern states in part because they had free labor (slaves). When that ended, our textile production moved overseas. Today, we constantly hear about issues of human rights and abused children in third world countries involved in these industries. Yet, we all want to buy a cheap t-shirt. Some craft stores even sell 3 shirts for $10 here in America.

I know I have glossed over a lot of details, and this still ran longer than I intended. GREAT questions, and thank you for starting this forum!

Sally

Craft, crafty, finely crafted, craftsman, and master craftsman. Craft, to me implies utilty but constructed with skill that rasies the finished product to the level of fine art. Art is something that provides no food. clothing, shelter, or healing benefit. It is simply to look at. Fine art implies some skill, discipline, and effort, but the result is sheer enjoyment of creativity. The two spheres overlap when a uselful object is aesthetically pleasing and created with a high degree of skill.

The less skill required to produce something, the cheaper it is to buy because a greated number of people can produce it. It takes less time amd talent. Cheap goods give rise to other forms of art and craft.

For example. without cheap cloth, the fashion industry as we know it would not exist. The ability to throw away ideas that did not work is critical, otherwise the cloth produced is so precious, so labor intensive, that only tried and true things could be made. We cannot go back to 100% human produced goods. At the same time, we need to understand the difference between handemade items and mass produced goods.

There is a point where the devices used switch from being the servant, to being the master. One can master a 10H footloom. One learns to operate a fly-shuttle computer driven dobby loom and better keep it producing, or the profits fall.

Do we want to weave 400+ thread count sheets by hand? I think not. But 24 epi linen dishtowels are an immensly satisying item for both weaver and recipient. Just because a sheet is larger does not mean it should not be cheaper to buy than the linen hand woven dishtowel. Our distorted perception of worthiness and costliness are wrapped up in the idea that everything has a price tag and that is the only real measure of its worth.

The replies to this forum are really interesting and I also hope everyone posts here rather than take it off-list.  Steve -- your kick off was excellent!

I feel pretty humble about my take on all of this as I'm not well informed on the history.  In my travels and personal experience I've found that hand weaving is primarily done for limited sales and more often as gifts or for personal use.  In India and Bhutan, for example, many of the cottage weavers make traditional textiles for themselves and relatives or friends, and they may sell some to supplement the family income.  But to make enough to live on they would need to be part of a bigger manufacturing firm.

The one thing I want to introduce to the discussion is:

1.      What are you thoughts on the Industrial Revolution;
Either UK or USA.

Coal and oil fueled the industrial revolution.  They are both running out.  What kind of revolution will that bring on?

1. Textiles have been produced "industrially" through manufacturing since at least the Pyramids of Egypt. Weaving requires skill and training. It takes several spinners to keep a weaver supplied with yarn. After the cloth leaves the loom there are specialized finishing processes - bleaching, dyeing, napping, etc. that require additional skilled labor. Then there is a need for distribution and sales - requiring additional workers. Most cloth seems to have been produced in the home of the weaver - in a "distributed manufacturing" environment where the yarn was brought to the weaver and the finished goods picked up by a merchant. Yes, there has often been a parallel tradition of weavers working for themselves, producing primarily what one could call "ceremonial" items - a special vest or baby carrier or skirt. This is what we tend to bring to mind whan handweaving is mentioned, not all the countless weavers who produced our potato sacks and bed sheets. The Fugger family in Germany organized first a weaving workshop and later consisted of several hundred weavers leading to such riches that they became wealthy bankers. Labor conditions - for handweavers as well as mill workers have never been luxurious. One of my books is titles "Want to live? You have to be a weaver" referring to a part of Bavaria where someone in the family had to run a loom to put food on the table.

Power looms pretty much put the production handweavers out of business or made mill workers out of them. Those weaving the "ceremonial items" continued. Oddly, though today we complain about weaving those utilitarian plain goods and how boring it muct of been, firsthand source material I've read, the weavers did not want to go from producing something with their hands to a situation where they were just machine attendants. This migration of weavers and other workers from their homes in rural areas to cities has been ongoing for a long time.

2. Weaving today. There are still a few professionally trained handweavers, but the majority of those producing on handlooms are hobby weavers who do it for enjoyment and creative outlet. Since there is fundamentally no difference between cloth woven on a power loom or a handloom (asuming same structure and materials) there won't be a lot of opportunity to exist as a production handweaver - unless the items produced are high end art objects - pictoral tapestry, one of a kind artwear, etc.

3. What has been lost? A sense of humility and willingness to work hard at learning to do the basic tasks of producing quality fabric. As handweaving has become more of an avocation, the "fruits of the loom" can be of rather high quality, but often are coarse, loosely woven fabrics that are quite unattractive, yet "precious" to the creator. With a little more willingness to learn and practice, those results could be much nicer and perhaps resonate better with the general public. "Real cloth" is quite possible, even easy to make, but few are willing to put that effort into the results.

4."Craft" to me is handwork - skilled handwork that produces quality goods. "Crafts" include weaving, making musical instruments, pottery, quality woodworking, wrought iron work, etc. The term has been adulterated, especially in the US, by the use of the word to describe any handmade project, including rather simple and poor quality work. This leads to a negative connotation that is difficult to deal with.

5. In the last 100 years, it has become considerably easier for private persons to own sophisticated handweaving equipment - including drawlooms, dobby looms both mechanical and computer controlled, hand operated Jacquard looms, etc. At the same time, the availability of high level instruction has dwindled leaving weavers with fancy looms lacking in-depth knowledge of how to utilize them. As the textile industry continues to improve technology, there might be an increasing need for aspiring handweavers to look more closely at what is going on with mills and power looms to keep abreast of developments - in yarns, fabric construction and many other things that would help handweavers develop their skills and wares.

6. Relevance to the here and now for handweavers includes the idea above that we develop our skills and products in accordance with what is current and desirable. Relevance would include not being afraid of knowing more about textiles in general, how they are mass produced and applying select techniques and ideas to our process.

1. The industrial Revolution had both negative and postive effects on culture and society.  The negative aspects were that it negatively impacted rural communities becaue many of the young men that were expected to continue farnming the family farm left to go to larger cities to work. asa result, farming communities and practices changed adversely, in many instances.  It also took away a great deal of value in hand made or hand crafted items and this is a negative impact that we see even today. The balance and relationship between humankind and the environment also shifted.  Of course, more people worked and goods were less expensive, but the no one at the time had the forsight to ensure an easy trasnition into industrialization, hence it being called a 'revolution.' 

2. Weaving today is growing, but only within a certain portion of the population.  Many people today want instant gratification and instant success and the process of weaving doesn't give them that feeling.  Weaving is a slow process in comparison to what most are use to and they can't appreciate the time and effort handweavers put into there work.  But, for us weavers, we have much more interaction with each other than before the net.  A great deal of learning and exchanging ideas are possible becasue of technology and sites such as Weavolution.   

3. No, I don't think we've lost anything.  I think our weaving world is more enriched by being part of a greater community than ever before.  We haven't lost, but society in general has becasue they don't know how great if feels to create and enjoy something made with one's own hands.  Look at Rita Buchanan, for example, who spins and then weaves almost every item in her home.  She enjoys the 'fruits of her labor' every single day.

4. Craft to me means handmade, as simple as that.  It something made for the love of making it.

5. I have little interest in loom technology and prefer hand loom over computer-generated  technology.

6. I can't understand what the question means.  How to make weaving a craft for the 22 century?  Does it mean to weave more art? With new materials, like wire ( already being done on both fronts)?  Weaving is what it is and has lasted the test of time.  I can't think of one person who wouldn't like to see a beautifully woven piece of fabric or wear something handwoven.  If handweaving is in museums, then it must be worth something.

Imagine it's 1860. You are a nearly adult girl living in a rural, remote village. You might be within 50 miles of a major city or industrial area, but the geography makes it impossible to easily travel far by walking or on horse back. 

About 70 people live in your village, and as one of the older children in a household full of children, your day begins at pre-dawn with physically demanding household and farming tasks, and finishes when you fall into bed exhausted. There is no idle time for "play", all leisure time is purposeful. Everyone is subsistence farming to survive in your village, along with some of the men working a few other jobs during the daytime.  

Maybe your village is big enough to have an inn/tavern, a saw or grist mill, and/or a general store. When deliveries can be made over the mountain or floated down by boat, you can find commercial cloth available the general store. It is becoming plentiful and the patterns are really attractive. Problem is, no one has cash money. It's a barter or credit system.

And then a sign is posted in a public place in the village, seeking factory workers (or mill girls). You consider your options;

-You make cash money for your work, (instead of no money at all.) 

-The hours are better (yes, long hours by today's standards, but not necessarily compared to a subsistence-farmer's work day in 1870.) 

-They provide housing and meals, (yes, subtracted from your income) but even after that, the money is so much more than you ever see in your village. The food might be much better. The accommodations might be nicer than you have ever experienced at home. You can work, have pocket money, and still send $ home to your family, too.

-The social aspects of being in the rooming houses with the other girls might have appealed greatly to some. The social circle of the village would be limited, and where ever you were in the pecking order among the girls your age, that is most likely where you will be stuck for the rest of your life.

-Your "marriage prospects" are going to be limited to the boys in the village and surrounds. If you travel to the city for a factory job, you are likely to meet boys with better "prospects" than can be had in your rural village. 

-Being in a more prosperous town means access to nicer goods. And with cash money in your pocket, you can afford to purchase some of these things that seemed unobtainable in the village.

It's not too hard to start to envision how enticing the opportunities that the industrial revolution provided would seem at the time. Especially for women.

I was exposed to this line of thought at a historic venue by an experienced demonstrator. I appreciated her pointing out a different perspective on this story. (And this wasn't Lowell, MA, but Patterson, NJ, with the silk mills.)

Sally

Talking to DH on this subject, he asked if we ever feel that we are keeping a skill alive in case of industrial collapse. 

I think, in general that we don't think that way.  We do feel connected with history.  And I suppose it is a good thought, to be keeping the skills alive.  I'll particpate in that idea.

Dovetailing off of Aunt Janet's comment, (and addressing questions #2, #5, #6)...

We tend to forget (because most of us are so far removed from the process today) that clothing is a basic necessity of life (like food, shelter, water). So even if computer-driven machines are producing all the functional textiles we consume, we still need people who understand the basic interlacements to design the fabrics produced on those machines, not to mention the software to run the machines, and the machines themselves. 

Also, there are contemporary and diverse applications for woven-based materials. There was an exhibit at the Cooper Hewitt a few years back (2006?) "Extreme Textiles." Some of the contemporary applications described were woven facades for buildings and a heart-sock implant (designed for COPD patients) that restricts an enlarged heart muscle. (That would be another source to possibly check out for your dissertation.)

As a handweaver, I have been asked to bid on projects. One interesting project was for a green technology company. They received a grant for development of a material that would remove certain pollutants from factory outgo. My task would be to weave their material to certain specifications so they could test various samples and conditions over the course of a year+.

The reason why folks approach handweavers for these kind of tasks is that factories want to produce a minimum run, and sometimes it might be more cost- or time- effective for the task at hand to make a smaller run first. 

When I am doing the "old-timey" demonstrating history-thing, I like to sometimes point out to visitors that there is a real need not to lose this knowledge (or we'll all be naked in 50 years! ;-) So that pint-sized visitor who thinks the looms are so cool may be the person who will keep me clothed in the future.

Sally

does he say the same of farmers?

(Meaning: there is always a place for the small producer, whether s/he produces salad, fabric or houses)

OK... it's been awhile, but firstly a BIG thankyou for all your responses, I've been editing, writting, swearing at Microsoft... But i'am nealy 300 word aways from completion of my 8,000 word disertation, all questions that were put in the forum have been merged into my work, and a full transcript will be added and the back for assesment purposes. My first draft hand in is in September, so I've got a feww weeks to ammend, check grammer. When it's been assesed, and I've got clearance to post it online, i'll give everybody a google link to see the disertation. Ashleigh.

OK... it's been awhile, but firstly a BIG thankyou for all your responses, I've been editing, writting, swearing at Microsoft... But i'am nealy 300 word aways from completion of my 8,000 word disertation, all questions that were put in the forum have been merged into my work, and a full transcript will be added and the back for assesment purposes. My first draft hand in is in September, so I've got a feww weeks to ammend, check grammer. When it's been assesed, and I've got clearance to post it online, i'll give everybody a google link to see the disertation. Ashleigh.

... Wilson's concept for the exhibit held last year at the Knoxville Museum of Art, Knoxville, Tenn., USA was an intriguing combination of historical textile production ideas with process.  You might want to take a look at the website for this exhibit at her website link here.  The research done for the exhibit is noted at the website, as well, and was very extensive.

Tommye

A literature review examines the existing literature to discover the strengths and weakness in the literature. As well as demonstrating knowledge of existing research, a literature review should also identify gaps in the literature that the thesis as a whole is intended to fill. It provides the backdrop to, and reasons for, conducting the research.Correspondingly to the academic degree, the last phase of an academic thesis is called in Spanish a defensa de grado, defensa magistral or defensa doctoral in cases in which the university candidate is finalizing his or her licentiate, master's, or PhD program.
Dissertation Proposal

Yes - no problem.

1. I'm from England originally and studied the effects of the Industrial Revolution from political and economic perspectives, but not from a social one (my favourite). The IR had to happen, and I guess its long-term positive aspects outweigh its shorter-term negative ones, ie increased productivity for the modern world vs. the unemployment it originally created. NOT that two wrongs make a right!

2. Weaving today? Bring it on! For some it's a pleasurable hobby and an art form, whilst for others it's still a necessary form of labour, either out of choice or because the IR hasn't got round to replacing it in some corners of the world. However, in many places this labour produces an art form for tourists, not just utilitarian products. Full circle?

3. If we compare a 21st century hobby with pre-IR production, then at first sight there would seem little in common. Nevertheless, the process hasn't changed so remarkably.

4. Craft to me = art/hobby.

5. Sorry - I know very little about this.

6. Demand for craft depends on the economy. When things are looking gloomy and people have less to spend (or believe they have less to spend?), the focus in on practical necessities rather than aethestics. We can watch Star Trek and imagine what emphasis peope will place on the arts in the future, but really the world's currently developing too fast to make assumptions.

7. From what I gather, spinning and weaving were taught in local (Aussie) schools in the 1970's, but nowadays this is not nearly as widespread. Like any art (pottery, sculpture, non-utilitarian wood- and metalwork, drawing, etc), they should continue to be offered, at least as a taster, so that all kids have access.

Hope at least some of that makes sense! Good luck with the dissertation.

Just seen the date on the original posting! Well, I hope it went well anyway.

Be very careful about this one.   There are many, many whole books
written about the difference between craft and art and it's a big topic
in the art world - with much analysis done on it.   Plus the definitions
have changed drastically over time, in fact, the definitions have been
slowly changing since the Renaissance.     You could do a whole
dissertation on just this topic. . . . . .

Kerstin, I'm sorry that I haven't been following these conversations.  But, I finally asked DH the above question.  His answer is no, he doesn't feel that he is doing that.  If we were, trying to keep old farming skills alive, we would have taught our steer to become a working Ox.  (that is the only difference between a steer and an ox, education)  We use a tractor, and other power tools, and that is his choice.  That being said, that little Ox, a Dexter with horns way out there, would look very cute in front of a plow.

Having seen this thread resurrected, it came to mind when I was reading a piece published in the December 1951 issue of the "Master Weaver" newsletter, which I believe was published by Leclerc. Verbatim, except for correction of a typo or two:
*
"WHY DO WE WEAVE?
*
In our era of mechanised civilisation, hobbies based on more or less ancient crafts seem rather incongruous. We have such modern pastimes as photography, radio, telescope building, miniature railway, which are all in touch with the latest progress in science and go step in step with the march of time. How then can we explain that quite a large part of humanity takes delight in walking just in the opposite direction? In producing unnecessary goods in the most primitive and hard way? calling relaxation exactly the same occupation which was called hard work two or three centuries ago?
*
The answer to these questions is neither obvious, nor simple. The two following factors are usually given as an explanation. First that our emotional life develops or rather changes at a much slower rate than our intellectual life, which created the present Western civilisation. Emotionally we are neither adapted to, nor satisfied with our modern way of life, particularly with its speed and its superficiality. Emotionally we are much more attached to the past, than we realise. And crafts take us back to this past, to a deliberte and harmonious way of doing things, without any regard for the time involved, without a thought about efficiency. The second factor is connected to the fact that in most cases our work, such as performed in a civilised society, presents but a small fragment of the complex process of production. Whether it is publishing, or making refrigerators, baking bread or even defending the country - the work of one man is so intricately interwoven with the work of others, that in itself it does not seem to make sense. Thus the worker is constantly frustrated, has no sense of achievement, and no pride in looking at the finished product. Now, how it all changes when he turns to crafts. He is performing the whole miracle of creating things all by himself, he develops a sense of responsibility since there is nobody to blame when he fails, but he takes all credit for success also. He is often admired by his environment, and perhaps can even sell a few things, which removes all doubts about the value of his production.
*
Whether this explanation is right or wrong, we feel there is more to it, and that these two factors are not the only ones.
*
It would be interesting to learn what is the opinion of other weavers on this rather controversial subject. Please write us, and we shall print some of your letters in the following issues, particularly these which present a different approach to the problem."
*
*
I have not yet looked through the succeeding issues of the newsletter to see if letters were published.