Comments on: Craft, Compulsion, Privilege, Pay

By: Lisbeth Oakley

Lisbeth Oakley — Wed, 19 May 2010 22:49:54 +0000

I know what you’re talking about. I’m going through the same thing currently… Thanks for sharing!

By: anneick

anneick — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:58:20 +0000

Saks, 5th Avenue. They may have been sold in Sacks, but I rather doubt it. D’oh.

By: anneick

anneick — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:57:22 +0000

I think I posted a comment on this before (but, foolishly, on the LJ RSS feed rather than here, and it’s vanished into the ether).

I can see your point about worrying that craft will become a chore. I grew up doing crafty things for fun, but also for use. We didn’t have the money or the spare time for me to indulge in craft for craft’s sake – I’ve never been one for decorative craftiness, and I think that’s why. When I was 13, I got my first job – linking and finishing garments for a local knitwear designer – and I kept that job until I was 17 (when she moved away). I supported myself through university largely by doing knitting and crocheting outwork for a couple of local firms, and during a recent period of unemployment I did the same. It paid very, very poorly, but it was a lifeline, and one I was only too willing to grab.

It was tedious at times – I remember being up all night sewing together 144 crocheted roses into a shawl/blanket-type thing, and swearing never, ever again. It was also enormous fun at times, and I still get a kick out of knowing that some of the things *I* made, with *my* hands were sold in Sacks, 5th Avenue. I still sell my own stuff occasionally, in the local craft shop, but mot in a serious or organised fashion. I think the point that I’m trying to make is that if it does start to become a chore – stop doing it for money for a while. It’s amazing how quickly the joy will come back into it.

By: leannich

leannich — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:55:00 +0000

@Ailbhe and Glitzfrau: What a fascinating discussion of Laura Ingalls Wilder. (The part about the buttonholes reminds me of my grandmother, whose mother placed her into the hotel business because she was so “good at” housework – not realising that her efficiency was the result of furious hatred and a determination to get it done as quickly as possible.)

As you know, I too was a devotee of the Little House books as a kid, but the small amounts that I’ve reread recently have made me quite queasy. The Libertarian bit might have a lot to do with that, Glitz. Thanks for that link (coz you know, I was looking for something to fill up all these barren hectares of free time…).

By: leannich

leannich — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:48:06 +0000

@Ailbhe: Interesting point on raising the status of undervalued work. Thinking about it, though, I wonder to what extent it’s in my power to do that. The Barber book makes clear that there have always been craft workers at every stratum of society, and my messing about with golden spindles has perhaps less to do with Asian factory workers than one might wish. Still, it’s certainly an aspiration, and I’ll be taking any opportunity I see to stick my oar in.

@Judi: Thanks! And I’m delighted to do my bit to spread the Barber love

By: Glitzfrau

Glitzfrau — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:20:13 +0000

Ailbhe – I have a secret sick fascination with the backstory of the Laura Ingalls Wilder books, because all three of them – Caroline senior, Laura and then Rose – seem to have been technicolour nuts with the most passive-aggressive intergenerational female relationship possible. Laura could never be feminine and obedient enough for her mother and took it out on Rose in turn. Not to mention their crazy libertarian politics and willing complicity in genocide. Do some googling, or I can recommend you books if you’re interested.

Actually, here’s a ref! After you posted this comment, I went a-wandering in Ingallsiana and came across a fascinating book suggesting that the whole series was written as an anti-New-Deal project to show the values of hard work, thrift, piety and gender-appropriate behaviour instead of the Democratic welfare state Roosevelt was proposing. Fascinating stuff – http://books.google.com/books?id=WC0ZMqoaiYsC&lpg=PA1&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

By: Ailbhe

Ailbhe — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:15:37 +0000

Helen: Aw, I always loved the bit where she decides to learn to love sewing for the sake of the results and to never again show her dislike for it, because she admires her mother so much.

By: Helen

Helen — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 10:38:28 +0000

Ailbhe – interestingly, I read a biography of Laura Ingalls Wilder that suggested that in real life, she was an enthusiastic hand-sewer, but characterised herself as an anti-sewing rebel in her books, as she was advised (by her daughter, perhaps?) that this would increase sympathy for the character. That suggests an intriguing set of implications about the conflicting statuses of writing and sewing, and the changing value of sewing between the 1880s and 1840s.

Léan – absolutely loved this thoughtful post.

By: Judi (Approachable Art)

Judi (Approachable Art) — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:36:57 +0000

“Textile work is women’s work, and as such is often difficult, undervalued, and underrewarded, but there are degrees of difficulty, value, and reward. I get to pick and choose how I want to engage with the field.”

Fascinating article- and now I’ll be reading your favorite book, too.

By: Ailbhe

Ailbhe — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:55:18 +0000

Also, bringing undervalued work up in status, that’s good too.

Laura Ingalls Wilder hated making buttonholes so much she got very very good at them. Her mother hated it too. Yet they also chose to use their skills to do work they hated to produce beautiful things they loved.