Geometry Is A Beautiful Thing.

Geometry is a beautiful thing.

This was my mini-relaxation project last night, and a test piece for some quilt designs. Pretty annoyed at how wonky a couple of the lines are, but that was a mix of: canvas distortion due to embroidery hoop when drawing the lines in the first place, and my fabric pen being too erasable. By the time I got around to the last lines the marks were pretty much gone.

I think the next step would be to set up the fabric on a square frame and prick the design instead. Or maybe I should just hand-sew it, instead?

Wonderful photo of the work, but please ignore my blurry face in the background.  I didn't realise I was going to be in some of the photos, and it was a very hot day and I'd been running around like crazy helping with the graduand leaving party. Hot and sweaty is not a flattering look.

Bristol-based art-academia-community group MakingLearning are producing a series of patchwork poems - each patch contains a word, and is made by a different person. I just did the piecing and the quilting. MakingLearning may be Bristol (uk) based, but for the patchwork poem project we've received patches from lots of different places - not just other places in the UK, but also from other countries in Europe, and other continents. So if you think this is something you'd like to participate in, please don't think distance is a barrier! Get in touch, and we'll post a patch out to you. MakingLearning has a Facebook page, which you should totally check out: https://m.facebook.com/makinglearning

K, L Q, R K is Dutch knot, L is French knot, Q is sorbello stitch, R is French cross stitch. I really like puzzling out how I'm going to group the different types of stitches within the whole sampler. Sorbello stitch is very similar to Dutch knot (the difference is 45 degrees), and French knot and French cross stitch are also similar. All four are types of knot stitch.

Small relaxation project from last night. Lots of detached chain stitch, buttonhole variant, a whipped woven wheel (or double whipped, I wrapped around the two strands of the chain stitch spokes separately) and Ceylon stitch in the middle. It was more an experiment in shape and design than stitch techniques. As you may be able to tell, I'm rediscovering my love for geometry.

So… This is the kind of thing I have mixed and complicated feelings about.

I’m not going to say “that isn’t art” because my position is that art is in the eye of the beholder.

But I *will* say that this is something that hundreds and thousands of knitters and crocheters the world over do ALL THE TIME. It’s called frogging. It’s just efficient. You find something that’s not going to be used or worn, but where the yarn is still reasonably undamaged and you frog it. You store the yarn for a future project.

Like I said, I’m not going to claim this isn’t art, but what I don’t understand is why it gets acknowledged as art when two white men do it in a gallery-space, and not when hundreds and thousands of (mainly) women do it every single day in their own home.

If Lernert and Sander are unaware that this is common practice amongst yarn-based crafters then their research is piss-poor and they should do better. If they did know, and just chose not to acknowledge their indebtedness then they’re just appropriative assholes.

Yes, frogging finished items is a beautiful thing and it’s art, but it was art already when everyone in the yarn-based craft community did it. These two men doing it doesn’t magically make it art when it wasn’t before.

I feel this is the sort of thing that they should have written an ‘academic’ (whatever that means) article about, acknowledging the actual community engaged in this practice and then discussing what makes it such a beautiful phenomenon, rather than just plagiarising a community’s common practice and getting praised for it because ‘omg, men working with a material stupidly designated by society as being for women, HOW AMAZING.’

I also have issues with this relating to necessity/thrift/class/wealth, but I cannot brain well enough to articulate those right now. But there’s definitely something insidious about taking a practice based on reusing and saving money and ‘making do’ and importing it into the corpulent, lucre-obsessed art world. And the act of importing it devalues the concept/practice in the same way private collectors devalue the work when they rip a Banksy piece of a wall and store it in their private galleries.