Request for needlework discussions
Stella Nemeth
In the absence of needlework groups in the us.* hierarchy, I am
posting this message to begun a discussion of the appropriatness of
using this newsgroup (us.arts) as a place to have needlework and
sewing discussions.
Many of us who do this kind of work see what we do as either artistic
(at the low end) or as an art form (at the upper end) suitable for
museum display. In fact, quilts have become a rather common item for
museums to display. Other forms of needlework generally don't get
displayed unless they are also historical items, although that might
change over time. Displays of clothing are quite common.
Would us.arts be an acceptable place to hold these discussions?
Remember that needlework groups tend to get very large very fast.
Among the things that need to be taken into consideration is the
likelyhood that the quilters and/or cross stitchers could easily
overwhelm the group in a very short time.
Please let me know how you feel about this.
Stella Nemeth at sne...@home.com
Henrietta K. Thomas
In us.arts on Sun, 21 Dec 1997 18:49:09 GMT, sne...@home.com (Stella Nemeth)
wrote:
>In the absence of needlework groups in the us.* hierarchy, I am
>posting this message to begun a discussion of the appropriatness of
>using this newsgroup (us.arts) as a place to have needlework and
>sewing discussions.
[posted and mailed]
If you had read the control message for us.arts and/or the checkgroups
list recently crossposted to us.config and news.admin.hierarchies, you
would know that the one-line description for us.arts is "General discussion
of US fine and performing arts."
Needlework is not a fine art.
Needlework is not a performing art.
Therefore, discussions of needlework would be off-topic here.
It would be more suitable in a group dealing with arts and crafts.
Furthermore, there is a moratorium on new group proposals
until we get the existing groups better organized.
Suggest you look for a needlework group in alt.* or the Big 8. :-)
Followups to poster.
Henrietta K. Thomas
us.* hierarchy coordinator
usa...@wwa.com
Jim Kingdon
> Needlework is not a fine art.
> Needlework is not a performing art.
> Therefore, discussions of needlework would be off-topic here.
To the extent that us.arts has some fine and performance art traffic
going, I could see the point in not overwhelming it with crafts stuff.
Those interested in needlework could always try us.misc, not much
chance people will say it is off-topic there :-).
As for why needlework might fit in us.*, it seems to fit to me. Why?
(1) There is a geographic aspect to the subject. No doubt some forms
or aspects of needlework in fact are geographically widespread, and
I'm sure that it doesn't neatly respect national boundaries. But I
also suspect that needlework practice varies quite a bit from place to
place (not that I know any details on this), publications and
conventions (to the extent they are relevant) would have a
geographical/national focus, &c.
(2) The statement "Remember that needlework groups tend to get very
large very fast." To me this means that the subject is not
particularly suited to some place like the Big 8 where there would be
lots and lots of posters and no way to break down the traffic. What
one needs in such cases (if this is indeed such a case) is some
smaller community, such as might be found on an online service, a
bulletin board, a local newsgroup, net.*, mod.*, &c.
Stella Nemeth
Russ Allbery <r...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>In us.config, Stella Nemeth <sne...@home.com> writes:
>
>> In the absence of needlework groups in the us.* hierarchy, I am posting
>> this message to begun a discussion of the appropriatness of using this
>> newsgroup (us.arts) as a place to have needlework and sewing
>> discussions.
>
>Out of curiosity, what would be nation-specific about a needlework group?
The differences fall into two categories: supply and equipment
availability and practice.
It can get pretty frustrating to discover that the great magazine is
published in New Zealand or Australia (which they are <g>) or that the
great supplier for heirloom sewing is in Canada (which exists too).
Practice differences are a bit harder to pinpoint. There is a lot
less of it than there used to be. I certainly don't have to import my
cross stitch materials and books from the UK anymore, which I did in
the late 60s. Or subscribe to a knitting magazine from the UK because
there is no such thing available in the US. But, although the UK and
Australian and German magazines are available in the US and US
quilting and cross stitch patterns are available in the UK and
Australia and Japan there are differences in what the designers design
and what kinds of supplies are easily available and what sorts of
needlework people in different countries do.
For example, Japanese quilts and American quilts don't look anything
alike, even when we use the same traditional pattern to make the
quilt.
I think that there is room for both international and more local
groups for many subjects, needlework being one of them.
Stella Nemeth at sne...@home.com
Stella Nemeth
usa...@wwa.com (Henrietta K. Thomas) wrote:
>In us.arts on Sun, 21 Dec 1997 18:49:09 GMT, sne...@home.com (Stella Nemeth)
>wrote:
>
>>In the absence of needlework groups in the us.* hierarchy, I am
>>posting this message to begun a discussion of the appropriatness of
>>using this newsgroup (us.arts) as a place to have needlework and
>>sewing discussions.
>
>[posted and mailed]
Posted only. There is now a general discussion and thread in
us.config.
>If you had read the control message for us.arts and/or the checkgroups
>list recently crossposted to us.config and news.admin.hierarchies, you
>would know that the one-line description for us.arts is "General discussion
>of US fine and performing arts."
>
>Needlework is not a fine art.
Them's fighting words. <grin>
At its best, needlework is a fine art. Anyone who has seen a
Baltimore Album Quilt knows that. I'm not saying that the quilt my
son-in-law is currently sleeping under is fine art, because it
certainly isn't, but the portrait of Princess Diana on the current
copy of Newsweek is as much a piece of art as it would have been had
it been rendered in paint instead of cloth. Whether it qualifies as
fine art is a matter of opinion. I have strong reservations, myself.
For more than a decade I've been convinced that Feminism will only
have won its case when the art of Mary Evans and the art of Berthe
Morisat (spelling not certain) are treated with the same respect. One
worked in cloth and the other in oil paint, but there is a strong
likelihood that Mary qualifies as more of a major artist than Berthe
does.
>Needlework is not a performing art.
True.
>Therefore, discussions of needlework would be off-topic here.
True only if all discussions of the decorative arts are totally off
topic in the newsgroup. You do get to decide that, but I get to state
my case before the decision is made.
Are discussions about 18th century furniture displays in museums off
topic for the group? How about Colonial silver? The pyramids as an
architectural grouping? Medieval cathedrals?
>It would be more suitable in a group dealing with arts and crafts.
I'm trying to put the discussion into a group about "arts." <grin>
>
>Furthermore, there is a moratorium on new group proposals
>until we get the existing groups better organized.
>
>Suggest you look for a needlework group in alt.* or the Big 8. :-)
There are needlework groups in the Big 8. They are very, very
overcrowded and the group currently in residence in the biggest one,
rec.crafts.textiles.needlework, likes it that way. However, great
numbers of people have left that group because it is too big and too
general and almost impossible to follow. The only group still in
existence in alt, as far as I am aware, is alt.sewing which didn't die
after the great restructuring of the textile groups four years ago.
>Followups to poster.
I changed that because the thread seems to have "taken."
Stella Nemeth at sne...@home.com
Stella Nemeth
Jim Kingdon <kin...@panix3.panix.com> wrote:
>> Needlework is not a fine art.
>> Needlework is not a performing art.
>> Therefore, discussions of needlework would be off-topic here.
>
>To the extent that us.arts has some fine and performance art traffic
>going, I could see the point in not overwhelming it with crafts stuff.
>Those interested in needlework could always try us.misc, not much
>chance people will say it is off-topic there :-).
>
>As for why needlework might fit in us.*, it seems to fit to me. Why?
>
>(1) There is a geographic aspect to the subject. No doubt some forms
>or aspects of needlework in fact are geographically widespread, and
>I'm sure that it doesn't neatly respect national boundaries. But I
>also suspect that needlework practice varies quite a bit from place to
>place (not that I know any details on this), publications and
>conventions (to the extent they are relevant) would have a
>geographical/national focus, &c.
There is a huge network of quilt shows. All local. And several
roaming and purely local shows for other kinds of needlework too.
Americans tend to do lots of crochet, and always have. Crochet
discussions die in the Big 8 groups because they get overwhelmed. The
current interest in heirloom sewing and smocking seems to be somewhat
international, but is quite heavily American as well.
>(2) The statement "Remember that needlework groups tend to get very
>large very fast." To me this means that the subject is not
>particularly suited to some place like the Big 8 where there would be
>lots and lots of posters and no way to break down the traffic. What
>one needs in such cases (if this is indeed such a case) is some
>smaller community, such as might be found on an online service, a
>bulletin board, a local newsgroup, net.*, mod.*, &c.
What has happened is that a lot of discussion has moved to mailing
lists, at times equally huge, but at least focused and on topic. But
I think there is room for discussions in more than one newsgroup or
hierarchy.
Stella Nemeth at sne...@home.com
Joe Bernstein
In article <349f8318.757620@news>, Stella Nemeth <sne...@home.com> wrote:
> Are discussions about 18th century furniture displays in museums off
> topic for the group? How about Colonial silver? The pyramids as an
> architectural grouping? Medieval cathedrals?
Um. Far as I know we haven't *got* any pyramids or mediaeval cathedrals
in the US, unless Hawaii is *much* much weirder than I knew (or is one
of our embassies unusually located?). :-)
I'm having a little trouble envisioning a US-specific discussion of those
topics, in all seriousness. Take for example the famous exhibit of the
treasures of Tutankhamun. Could one seriously argue that anything about
that exhibit was truly US-specific? On the other hand, I don't think
when the Oriental Institute here in Chicago reopens its galleries, it's
likely to be anything to advertise nationwide; if it's impressive
enough, someone will bring it up on sci.archaeology*, if not, they won't.
I'm beginning to get the impression that you're looking for us.* groups
to become havens for smaller discussions than the Big 8. The problem is
that some of us involved in this are specifically interested in getting
superb propagation of us.* precisely so that US-specific groups no longer
need be created *in* the Big 8. So I'm not persuaded that us.* = small
is a good long-term strategy, or rather, I hope it isn't.
That said, obviously particular topics can have US-specific angles.
I have no problem with the claim that needlework is such; I'd imagine
that US fandom is another. So not every group need be "political".
Furthermore, the US's, um, provincialism remains fairly strong, though
I think it's a lot weaker than say 20 years ago; groups that have no
objective basis for US-specific discussion might thereby acquire one.
This, I think, is where something like needlework comes in.
(Oh. Here's something I *suspect* is a totally non-political but
highly US-specific activity: model train collecting, I mean like
HO size and all that. As I recall, the Europeans and everyone else
use severely different sizes. Corrections welcome, it's been a
couple of decades since I paid any attention to that stuff...)
This is maybe the wrong place to post this, but my real point here is
to get you to clarify. I'm looking for us.* = US-specific. Are you
looking for us.* = small ?
Joe Bernstein
PS Not that they're very small anyway, but I've never heard of the
pyramids or cathedrals described as "craft" work before. Isn't
architecture usually considered a fine art?
--
Joe Bernstein, writer and bookseller jos...@tezcat.com
Speaking for myself alone http://www.tezcat.com/~josephb
Jim Kingdon
> So I'm not persuaded that us.* = small is a good long-term strategy,
> or rather, I hope it isn't.
I don't see us.* as "small" in the way that a city-specific hierarchy
is, or a company-specific hierarchy, or something like that. But I do
see it as (somewhat) smaller than the Big 8. Or perhaps just as
validly, _different_ from the Big 8. So if mod.* and us.* and de.*
and uk.* and nz.* and the Big 8 and so on each have a group, then each
one can be "sufficiently" small without any hierarchy being
particularly small (except in comparison to what it would be like
if it were the only one).
For the most part, I guess my expectation is that this kind of thing
will naturally grow out of what people want to discuss. If there is
no need for a us.* group, it won't prosper.
Stella Nemeth
jos...@tezcat.com (Joe Bernstein) wrote:
>In article <349f8318.757620@news>, Stella Nemeth <sne...@home.com> wrote:
>
>> Are discussions about 18th century furniture displays in museums off
>> topic for the group? How about Colonial silver? The pyramids as an
>> architectural grouping? Medieval cathedrals?
>
>Um. Far as I know we haven't *got* any pyramids or mediaeval cathedrals
>in the US, unless Hawaii is *much* much weirder than I knew (or is one
>of our embassies unusually located?). :-)
>
>I'm having a little trouble envisioning a US-specific discussion of those
>topics, in all seriousness. Take for example the famous exhibit of the
>treasures of Tutankhamun. Could one seriously argue that anything about
>that exhibit was truly US-specific? On the other hand, I don't think
>when the Oriental Institute here in Chicago reopens its galleries, it's
>likely to be anything to advertise nationwide; if it's impressive
>enough, someone will bring it up on sci.archaeology*, if not, they won't.
One could argue that since the Tutankhamun exhibits were in US (and
Canadian) museums, that discussions of those exhibits and how they
were set up in each museum could have purely local aspects.
>I'm beginning to get the impression that you're looking for us.* groups
>to become havens for smaller discussions than the Big 8. The problem is
>that some of us involved in this are specifically interested in getting
>superb propagation of us.* precisely so that US-specific groups no longer
>need be created *in* the Big 8. So I'm not persuaded that us.* = small
>is a good long-term strategy, or rather, I hope it isn't.
I'm not actually thinking us.* = small so much as us.* = both a local
and a different (additional) hierarchy for newsgroups. I don't think
there is an Orange County needlework newsgroup (the hierarchy does
exist however), but I don't see any reason why there couldn't be one.
I understand that there is some worry about duplicating newsgroups,
but if there is enough traffic for multiple groups and it isn't all
cross posted, I don't understand why this is a problem.
>PS Not that they're very small anyway, but I've never heard of the
>pyramids or cathedrals described as "craft" work before. Isn't
>architecture usually considered a fine art?
It all depends on where you draw the line. Metal work, for example,
is usually considered a decorative art, but not when the metal is
worked into 5 foot statues of David, or into the doors of major
Italian churches.
Stella Nemeth at sne...@home.com