The Sweating System – The Employer’s Point of View

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)

This talk deals with some of the problems and the opportunities of an employer in the London Clothing Trade in the later 19th century.

Notes from a talk by Madelaine Ginsburg.

‘The Sweater’ In the Clothing Trade is regarded as:

  1. One who grinds the face of the poor
  2. One without skills or capital who makes a living out of others
  3. A middle man

There is a great deal of prejudice against the employers of the past.

Many investigations interviewed employees but not their employer.  However, they were people.  Few personal papers are in existence, and no account books have been kept.

All tailors had first to be apprentices, then journeymen, before being masters.  As soon as they employed others they were suspect as oppressors, especially if they employed outworkers.

There were many outworkers making garments for slopshops or showshops (cheap clothes).  Masters could not afford space for workers as accommodation prices went up.  Outworkers increased as the century went on, supplemented by women workers.

Tailoring unions from 1880s, but the trade not easy to unionise.

Men did not welcome women in Trade Unions, and women did not take to Unions.

Many outworkers were Jewish immigrants barred from Unions.  Many employers discharged Union members.

Jews hoped to be employers (even when young) so tended not to join Unions.

The late 19th century saw increased demand through increased population and rising standards of living.  Therefore there was more work.  White collar workers were growing in number and needed smarter clothes.  Production rose 500% between 1861 and 1911.  Prices dropped.

Many garments were exported across the British Empire.

There was great demand for uniforms (non-seasonable work) – much of these made with female outworker labour.

The Sewing machine speeded work.  By 1870, ½ million machines in use in tailoring trade.  These could be £7 to £8 by 1888, with several months to pay.

Cutting machines came in in the 1890s.

The Industry was labour intensive and took up a lot of room.  People were cheaper than new machines, and employers were slow to bring in machines for this reason.

Transport was expensive, as was travel for workers.  Overcrowding of areas where tailoring was principle industry – i.e. East of London and Leeds (but never as bad as London).

Various factory acts during the 2nd half of the 19th century were designed to better the lot of employees.

Many employees were paid piece work and resented the restrictions of shorter hours.

Various waves of immigrants from Europe formed the source of the workers in the clothing trade – mostly Jews.

The peak was 1881-2

By 1891 restrictions on immigrants were in progress.  Subsequent rise of anti-Semitism as Jews rose up through the social classes.

Jews were a close knit community.  They set up their own systems of welfare and assistance.

Most employers were Jews, employing Jews.  The Garment Trade was dominated by them by the end of the century.

In men’s tailoring the non-Jewish workers were gradually pushed out.  Any hand, who could save a £1 as capital, could rise to be an employer and a sweater.

Madelaine Ginsburg was assistant keeper (dress) at the Victoria and Albert Museum.  Mrs Ginsburg is the author of many articles on the clothing trade, and her books include ‘Victorian Dress in Photographs’, An Introduction to Fashion Plates’ and (with Prudence Glyn) ‘In Fashion.’  She also contributed to the V&A’s publication ‘Four Hundred Years of Fashion’, edited by Natalie Rothstein.

Fashion Slaves

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)

The title inspired by Redgrave’s paintings, this talk is about the dresses once they have been made and delivered – the story is not finished then, there was upkeep and maintenance to be done – and what it was like to be a ladies maid.

Notes from a talk by Christina Walkley

Both the lady and the dressmaker were slaves of fashion – as was the lady’s maid who had to care for the clothes.

Even most extravagant lady expected her money’s worth.  Most dresses were refreshed, re-trimmed and often restyled.  These tasks were given to the lady’s maid.

Masters and Mistresses were dependent on servants.  Daily services included:

Draining bath, setting out underclothes, putting on stockings, doing hair, buttoning gloves, putting items in bags, etc.  (Almost like dressing a child.)

Ladies maids also dusted china, washed fine linens, cared for dogs, and did millinery and dressmaking.  They needed to be good organisers, skilled needlewomen, tactful, and sympathetic.

Ladies had a duty to be smart lest they earn the contempt of their maids.

Most ladies maids would ultimately receive their mistresses clothes as perks.

Maids had better surroundings and more variety in their tasks than dressmakers.  There were no fixed standards for wages.

A good ladies maid could be asked to do all sorts of tasks if she were the only person to be trusted.

Mistress and maid could develop a good relationship, even if the work for the maid was long and hard.  Some maids gave lifelong service, but the work demanded skill, concentration and service.  They did not do coarse work, but did clean shoes, care for lace and stockings.

Stockings and shoes needed special care.

A Lady was judged by the state of her gloves.  If rich, gloves would be thrown away when dirty, but their cleaning was laborious and involved several processes.

Cleaning hats and bonnets was also difficult to handle.  They had to be taken apart and then cleaned.  (A good opportunity to restyle.)

Care of lace was a special task.  A bottle was covered in white linen and the lace was tacked to it.  This was soaked overnight, then boiled.  The lace was dried on the bottle without rinsing.

Stain removal was another skill of the maid.

Christina Walkley was Assistant Keeper at Platt Hall from 1971 until 1972, and then Keeper until 1977.  Ms Walkely has worked since then as a freelance lecturer and writer.  She has written ‘Crinolines and Crimping Irons’ and ‘The Ghost in the Looking Glass.’  Due to be published in March (the year of the conference) was ‘The Way to Wear ‘em: 150 years of Punch Fashion.’

Clothes and Disease 1830- 1889

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)

A detailed look at how disease was spread through clothing, old and new, to all strata of society.

Notes from a talk by Lou Taylor.

Following 1840’s ‘Song of the Shirt’ there was a widely held belief that disease was spread through clothes.  Medical research was not widespread.  Prevalent diseases: Typhoid, Diphtheria, Diarrhoea,  Cholera, Whooping cough etc.  No-one could pinpoint contagion.

Robert Gough and Louis Pasteur introduced idea of bacteria.

Writing of the period tells us what people thought.

Henry Mayhew – Evening Chronicle, 1849 Bermandsey Tour (large % of population working class) guided by doctor, where a Barber had Scarlett Fever, then Typhus.  Child died of Cholera, wife now ill of it.  Workshop was dining room with seepage from neighbour’s privy soaking through wall.  Drinking water drawn from river.

1849 (Mayhew)  Tailor dying of consumption but his clothes and bedding pawned.  Covered with a coat, newly made, which was to go to shop the next day.

C. Kingsley 1848. Cheap, nasty clothes. When clothes pawned workers used the clothes they made to cover them at night.  Children with Cholera covered with a half-finished riding habit.

Therefore: new clothes could spread disease.

1872 John Thompson’s London features 2nd hand clothes shops and pawn shops.  Both shops could receive diseased clothes and pass them on.

Where living conditions were poor, washing almost impossible.

Mayhew, 1849.  Sheets been on beds nearly 3 months.  No clean shirt this month.  Could not afford to pay for washing.  Scarce a house without yellow linen hanging out to dry over water (stained with sulphur).

Germs could live in clothes or toys for several years.  Dead child’s toys could pass on scarlet fever.

In 17th century the plague was spread by infection in bales of cloth, especially silk.

In 1665 regulations re fumigating bedding were announced.

Pepys kept a new wig several months before wearing it because of plague.

1777 Dr Mead.  Disease could be spread through dirt in clothes, food etc.

By early 19th century cholera came to England from India.  Spread across Europe – Novogorod 1829, Poland 1831, Hamburg 1831.  College of Physicians decreed quarantine for boats carrying flax.

Oct 1831 Cholera in Sunderland.  2nd epidemic 1840s (coupled with Typhus – brought in by starving Irish settlers)

(Good book – Whimsloe: The Sources and Modes of Infection.)

Many 19th century people believed that Cholera was spread through the air.  ‘Miasma.’

Slums bred diseases, but upper class also died (Prince Albert!)  Therefore people began to think of drains.  By mid-19th century preventative measures being taken.  Limewashing and disinfection of drains.

However, the real causes of disease not known.

Lou Taylor was Senior Lecturer in Dress and Textile History at Brighton Polytechnic.  Chairman of the Textile Society and author of ‘Mourning Dress, Costume and Social History

The Beaders

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)

An updating of a short paper read at the first Costume Society Symposium, London, April 19th.

Notes from a talk by Joan Edwards.

Two ways of Beading:

  1. Sewn on with needle (bead embroidery)
    1. Worked before making up
  2. Formed into ornaments and then sewn on.
    1. Added after making up.

Bead embroidery (1) is very skilled.  Bead work (2) is unskilled.

1904 Berlin exhibition to show exploitation of home workers.  Taken up by London clergyman who made up his own exhibition in Church Hall.

1906 another German exhibition featuring evidence gathered.  Many workers hesitant to send examples for exhibition for fear of losing jobs.

Women’s Industrial Council received report on embroidery as a home work (Included beaders and artificial flowers).  Some cases of middlewomen, who finds workers and then pays them.  Worker reluctant to give evidence.  14-15 hours a day needed for a living wage – i.e. 1shilling 1 ½ average.  The posture needed for work caused bad eyesight and nerves.

2 May 1906  Daily news Sweated Industry exhibition.  Showing workers in action.  30,000 visitors by 29th May at 1 shilling entry each.

Fashion fluctuation makes trade varying.  Low wages or no wages.  Beading trying on eyes.

Women’s Industrial Council 1907 published a hardback on ‘Sweating.’

1907 Sweated Industries exhibition in Oxford opened by Viscount Milner.

1913 Glasgow.  Scottish Council for Women’s Trade – exhibition on ‘Sweating’ entitled ‘The Song of the Shirt.’

Beaders persuaded to take part, nameless, on stand 10.  Number 19 worked beading on shoes – was paid 6 shillings a week, worked 12 hours per day, had to provide her own needles.  Number 20 earned 5 shillings per week making beaded ornaments, had to fetch work (3 hours walking) – cut out buckram, bind it, sew on beads.  Work bad for eyes.

Exploitation still exists.  Bengali workers in London, Brick Lane.

Joan Edwards had just published the sixth of her small books on the history of Embroidery (The Bead Embroidered Dress) and was writing a biography of Dorothy Benson who worked for forty years in the Embroidery Department of the Singer Sewing Machine Company.

Shirtmaking

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)

Sweated labour in the shirt trade was one of the first areas in which it caught public attention; in the early 1840s the celebrated court case Moses V the Widow Bidell concerned shirtmaking and so, of course, did Hood’s ‘Song of the Shirt.’  This talk traces the trade’s development through the 19th century.

Notes from a talk by Sarah Levitt.

1843: The Song of the Shirt – best known poem of the 19th Century – became a national catch phrase and a song.

1844 A play opened with the ‘Song’ as a prologue.  It drew the public’s attention to the plight of needlewomen.

(Slide) Redgraves ‘Seamstress’ 1846.  (see: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O1250737/the-poor-seamstress-watercolour-drawing-redgrave-richard-cb/) One of several picture on the same theme – also Watts and Millais

Seamstresses feature in novels of the 19th century.  Romantic feeling about these girls due to ‘there but for the grace of God go I.’   Distressed gentlewomen, or poor middle class, officers and clergymen’s daughters.

Distressed gentlewomen’s association set out to help.  The alternative to sweated labour was often prostitution.

Clothes making was one of the major industries of Britain between 1826 and 1914.

The standard of living gradually rose all round – any amelioration of conditions must be set against the gradual rise all round.

Clothing trade seasonal and utilised vast hordes of unemployed – i.e. Irish, Italian, and Jewish immigrants.

Middleman and outworkers system.

18th Century slop shops sold cotton and linen ready made shirts etc.  These people became the outfitters of the 19th century and their workers became the sweated labourers as they poached into the tailorer’s trade.

1840s – Tailors strike.

1843 – Poem by Hood.

1844 – Children and Young persons’ act.

1842 – 5,000 women employed in shirt making 4/6 per dozen, at 2 per day

1849 –  Henry Mayhew gives more info: ‘The worst work to be had.’  6d per shirt if good, 2d for bad ones.  Wages going down, outworkers.

Early 19th Century shirts like smocks – no curves, in pieces.  Low shoulder line, gathered sleeve, gusset under arm.  Re-enforced front.  Tunic shirts.

Plain sewing was part of every girl’s education.  Many miniature garments survive.  Best shorts have tucked fronts and little gussets at top of side slits – very finely stitched.

1840s/50s new design in shirts.  Raglan sleeves and better shaped.  Shirt fronts were worn under waistcoats and jackets with false cuffs – no body to the shirt.  A vast variety of shirts, shirt fronts, collars and cuffs – 97 types of shirt, 18 versions of flannel shirts, at least 12 different fronts.  Collars and cuffs could be reversible.  Paper, celluloid and rubber collar and cuffs available.

Flannel shirts very popular.  Striped cotton shorts known as regatta shirts made for 10d per dozen.

Collar and cuff making were a separate trade.

1915 1/5, 4/9, 2/6 per dozen machine made shirts.

London a centre for shirt making, but also Manchester, Glasgow, Taunton, Leeds etc.

By the end of the 19th century Ireland was an important centre for shirt making in factories.  Firms came from Glasgow, London, and Manchester to set up factories.

1855 – sewing machines installed for shirt making.

By 1858 200 machines using 200 yards of cotton per day.

Sewing machines expanded the sweating system.  Finishing was done by outworkers at home.

It was not possible to unionise outworkers.  Could not band together to help themselves.

Sweated industries exhibition 1906.

1909 Trade Boards Act tried to protect these workers.

Army, post office and government departments acted as exploiters, setting minimum wages (only just abolished).

Sarah Levitt was Assistant Curator at the City of Bristol Museum and Art Gallery.  Previously Assistant Keeper at Platt Hall, Miss Levitt has an MA in The History of Dress from the Courtauld Institute of Art.  Her interest in shirt making stems from research for her book published the month of the conference, Victorians Unbuttoned: Registered Designs for Clothes, their Makers and Wearers.

Women who Wove

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)

Black crape was produced in large quantities in Victorian times for the mourning garments of the middle classes.  This session looks at the lives and conditions of working class women and girls employed by Courtaulds in an Essex mill to make the crape.

Notes from a talk by Judy Lown

(Presented at the Costume Society Seminar on ‘Sweated Trades’ Feb 8th 1986)

Courtaulds is one of the ten biggest national textile companies in Britain, and exports all over the world.

Samuel Courtauld started in Essex in 1815.

In the 1820s he had only a handful of workers and made £100 per anum.

By the 1840s he had 400 people in his employ

1850s he moved his family to Gosford Hall, and was aiming to become gentry

In 1881 he died, leaving 2 ½ million pounds.

The family made a fortune out of silk.

Textile work is a female orientated trade.

Essex was a thriving silk producing area in the early 19th century, but by 1860 many firms were extinct.  Courtaulds survived, employing 75% of women workers in the mid 19th Century.

Halstead, Bocking, Braintree were silk centres

Essex was formerly a wool producing area – by the late 18th century this trade declined with the concentration in the North, leading to a depression in Essex among females (women having formerly been wool spinners).  The Spitalfields silk industry had become chaotic by the late 18th century due to demands for wages.  (Silk has always been a female industry from the Middle Ages onwards, but there were no guilds for them.  By the late 18th century they were pushed down to lowest earnings.)

Silk manufacturers looked for new places for their industry.  Essex was an ideal location and the industry moved there, where there was surplus labour to be taken up, which could be cheaply employed.

The main produce was black silk crepe, with a special weave produced by Courtaulds for the mourning trade.

This had a real boost in 1862 on the death of Prince Albert.

The special machinery developed for this was worked by young people – girls to 17, boys to 15 – silk winding only.  Only men were allowed to work the crimping machinery, and the crimping room was kept locked.

Halstead mill workers in the 1850 – women workers wore aprons, with male overseers.  Men were engineers and mechanics.

The mills were 3 miles apart and material was transported from one mill to another for different processes.  Men were employed as drivers and waggoneers.

There were fines for being late  and if they were 5 minutes late they had to wait 15 (before being allowed to start work?)

There were rules about not wearing crinolines which were considered dangerous (machinery) and indecent (when standing up on machinery).

(The family (Courtaulds?) were Unitarians with radical traditions, but were opposed to protective legislation – they felt that employers should create a family atmosphere in mills, not rely on the law).

Middle-class families were realising the ideal of ‘woman in the home.’  This threw up the position of working class women who needed to work.  The ‘patriarchal family’ system kept women at the bottom of lists.  There was a good deal of concern about working women not learning domestic arts.

A school was set up in the factory for young women.  Mary Merryweather was the school teacher.  She kept a diary, recording: 120 girls first week – free – class overfull.  Girls were noisy and unruly.  No womanly constraint.

A nursery was provided.  Rules were strict but not understood by women who did not agree with too much clothes changing.  It only ran for 3 years.

Other innovations included a room being provided for meals, and an Amusement society (in the late 19th century) – an early social club.

Dr Judith Lown was working full-time for the ILEA in their Adult Education Training Unit, based at the City Literary Institute.  Dr Lown’s research on the Courtaulds silk industry was carried out between 1977 and 1983, and was being written up as a book.

A Species of Slavery: Dress making for High Society in the 19th Century

(see http://www.mythweaver.co.uk/stitchery/snippets/stitch-stitch-stitch-in-poverty-hunger-and-dirt/  for details of the conference at which this talk was presented)


For young girls preparing for their ‘coming-out’ the choice of spectacular dresses to wear at the prescribed events was a major consideration: this talk is about the women who made these dresses working for long hours undertaking tedious and intricate work for low wages.

Notes from a talk by Joanna Marschnner

(Presented at the Costume Society Seminar on ‘Sweated Trades’ Feb 8th 1986)

Two classes of dressmakers – honourable, and sweated.

1st class – was suitable work for those not fitted to be governesses or similar.  Daughters of clergy, middle class etc.

Dressmakers made garments.  Milliners made hats, caps, and trimmings.

Apprenticeships lasted 3 years.

March to July were busiest seasons, the highlight being court presentation.  Dress required – had written regulations, must have long train, feather headdress and veil.  Dresses of silk, tulle, ninon (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninon )  They were a great consumption of fabric.

1863 – a letter from a dressmaker in the Times described death in the workshop due to overwork.  This was Mary Ann Walkley, working at Madam Elise in Regent Street (Princess Alexander was a client there.)  (see https://bust.com/style/18808-mary-walkley-death-seamstress.html for a detailed account of this tragedy.)

Girls lived in cubicles in dormitories, 2 girls to a bed.

Workrooms were crowded and un-ventilated.  Windows were unopened so as to keep out smuts.  There was no chance of exercise, and fresh air was lacking.

Meals were consumed rapidly at irregular hours.  They were unappetising.  A 12 hour day was normal but in the season could be 6:00am to 11:pm, and sometimes they worked all night for Royal drawing rooms to complete orders.

Trimming dresses and making trains involved standing for long hours.

This case inspired research and many horror were uncovered.  The system and conditions undermined health.  The mortality rate of needlewomen was thrice that of other classes of occupation.  Some hands were dismissed for giving evidence.

Many earnest moves were made to alleviate conditions.  Societies formed, and authors wrote of milliners and dressmakers in books.  A few employers relaxed their systems and allowed a reduction in hours.

After 1863:

1869 – laws to prevent more than 12 hours for dressmakers, but were difficult to enforce.  Customers were responsible by wanting dresses at short notice.

1875 – re-organisation of systems, dressmakers allowed to live out

20th Century – girls still sometimes worked all night to finish orders.

Investigations into conditions started in 1842, but nothing much done or brought to public attention until 1863 after death of M.A. Walkley

In 1863 1 hand, plus 1 apprentice took 1 day to complete a dress.

Many witnesses of the 1860s said that conditions had improved from the 1840s

By 1870s day work (non living-in) was becoming more common.  However, senior hands still lived in.

Much of this work was done by hand.  Sewing machine work was very unpopular, and it was mainly used for foundation work and skirts.

Joanna Marschner was (at the time of the conference) Assistant curator of the Court Dress collection, Kensington Palace.  She had previously been Museum Assistant in the Department of Costume and Textiles at the Museum of London.

Stitch, Stitch, Stitch – In Poverty, Hunger, and Dirt

In February, 1986, the Costume Society, in association with the Pasold Research Fund, presented a ‘Sweated Trades’ seminar, focusing on the harsh realities which produced the handsome clothes of the 19th Century, and the Victorian age in particular.  The presentations considered how seamstresses, employers, and, for that matter, the wearers, were locked together by the rigid bonds of Society.

My mother attended the seminar, and made notes during the lectures, some of which will have informed her own work over the years.  Those notes will be transcribed as a series of entries in this Blog, more or less as they were written thirty years ago.

The Seminar was framed by ‘The Song of the Shirt’ – a poem by Thomas Hood (1799 – 1845), in which an overworked, underpaid seamstress laments the harshness of her life:

With fingers weary and worn
With eyelids heavy and red,
A woman sat; in unwomanly rags,
Plying her needle and thread.

Stitch – Stitch – Stitch!

In poverty, hunger and dirt,
And still with a voice of dolorous pitch

She sang ‘The Song of the Shirt.’

The full text of ‘The Song of the Shirt’ can be found on the Victorian Web: http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/hood/shirt.html

(See also: http://www.victorianweb.org/index.html for other resources concerning the period.)

The papers presented were:

A Species of Slavery.’  Dressmaking for High Society in the 19th Century – Presented by Joanna Marschner

Women who Wove’ – Presented by Judy Lown

Shirtmaking’ – Presented by Sarah Levitt

The Beaders’ – Presented by Joan Edwards

‘Clothes and Disease. 1830 – 1880’ – Presented by Lou Taylor

‘Fashion Slaves’ – Presented by Christina Walkley

And

‘The Sweating System – The Employers point of view.’ – Presented by Madeleine Ginsburg

Notes from these presentations will follow, each as a separate post.  Their contents may be of interest to anyone writing, researching, or even role-playing, in 19th Century settings.  Writers of Victorian crime, fictional social history, or fantasy may find ideas for settings, characters, or even plot.  Steampunk aficionados may wish to consider just who made their wonderful outfits, and how much they were paid/rewarded.

These are just notes, and are presented as starting points for personal research, rather than comprehensive facts.  Where relevant, web links will be added to help point interested parties at further avenues of research.

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Some thoughts on craft and crafting.

On the ‘About’ page for this blog, I have called myself a ‘crafter’ – which I am – but it’s a term that I probably need to expand on a little, since my definition is broad, than rather precise, and acknowledges working with insubstantial materials, like words, and with esoteric forces (like magic) alongside the mundane.

The Mirriam Webster on-line dictionary defines ‘craft‘ as:

Skill in planning, making, or executing;
An occupation or trade requiring manual dexterity or artistic skill <the carpenter’s craft> <the craft of writing plays> <crafts such as pottery, carpentry, and sewing>
Skill in deceiving to gain an end <used craft and guile to close the deal>;
The members of a trade or trade association;
plural usually craft a :  a boat especially of small size b : aircraft c : spacecraft

Put that last one aside for a minute (boats, planes and rockets being potential subjects of my crafting, rather than products of it), and focus on the others.  The word ‘craft’ comes from the Old English cræft, meaning skill, strength, and is related to the Old Norse kraptr power, skill, and the Old High German kraft.  The definitions as given cover a range of activities, all of which – arguably – focus on the creation of something.  That could be an item, an idea, or even the realisation of an intention.

Mirriam Webster goes on to extend the definition of craft with a wider discussion of synonyms:

Art, skill, cunning, artifice, craft mean the faculty of executing well what one has devised.
Art implies a personal, unanalyzable creative power
Skill stresses technical knowledge and proficiency
Cunning suggests ingenuity and subtlety in devising, inventing, or executing
Artifice suggests technical skill especially in imitating things in nature
Craft may imply expertness in workmanship

The common understanding of the term crafter (one who crafts) tends to focus on art, and skill.  There are, inevitably, discussions and disagreements about where the dividing line between crafter and artist lies (and even whether there is a line, for that matter.)  There is probably a spectrum that runs between making and creating, with hobby ‘crafters’ at one end, making things from kits and published patterns, through a variety of dabblers and amateurs, to the professional artist/crafter at the other.  I tend to hang around in the middle of that, mostly working in textiles, trying out techniques and being generally interested in all sorts of things.

When I’m not busy stitching (or weaving, or spinning, or painting, or dyeing, etc, etc) I’m something of a storyteller: a practitioner of wordcraft, creating characters and settings, exploring ideas, weaving words into new patterns, and wrestling with sentences in the hope they make sense.  (I don’t always succeed, but I do try …)

Occasionally, I practice another kind of craft.  One that brings in aspects of both cunning and artifice.

Which is why my definition of crafter extends from needlecraft, through wordcraft, and ends up with Witchcraft.

And sometimes, you’ll find me weaving all three together …