February 27 – March 1, 2002
These restored messages come from the Quilt History List, an online forum where quilt historians, collectors, researchers, appraisers, and enthusiasts discussed antique quilts and related textiles. The archive dates from 1996 through approximately 2016 and is being restored gradually. Sign up in the form at the bottom of the page if you want to know when a new page is added. Original spelling, opinions, formatting, and inactive links may remain unchanged.
Primary topics of this QHL Digest:
- The Great Polyester and Double-Knit Quilt Revival — A wave of members reclaim 1970s polyester, double-knit, and qiana quilts as legitimate textile history, sharing favorites and debating their long-term collectibility.
- HIPV Debate Winds Down — The Hidden in Plain View discussion continues into its second week, with several members, including a historian, urging a more measured, source-based approach and calling for the thread to close.
- Pennsylvania White-on-White Quilts — Members discuss a Hannah Welsh whole-cloth white-on-white quilt at the State Museum of Pennsylvania and related published research on the collection.
- Quilting Along the Oregon Trail — A member starts a research inquiry into what is documented about quiltmaking and quilters traveling the Oregon Trail.
- Batting Choices: Poly, Poly-Cotton Blend, and Vintage Battings — Members compare experiences with polyester and poly-cotton blend battings versus older cotton battings in both new and antique quilts. (see the article on quilt batting)
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 06:24:29 -0500 | From: “Zendelle Bouchard” <zendelle@>
A woman I know has a ’70s quilt top made for her by a friend, it is
scrap
squares about 5″ with a yoyo in the center of each one. Each square
and yoyo
is a different polyester doublknit. Sounds hideous but I love it! And
won’t
some fabric historian go crazy for it in a hundred years? It is such
a
perfect time capsule of the era.
Zendelle in NH
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 06:37:39 EST | From: JBQUILTOK@
I agree that we should be paying attention to 70’s double knit
quilts. They
will be the rarity in the future. Feedsack quilts weren’t exactly
revered in
their day & now we fight over them – esp if we have ‘proof’ like the
needle
holes in some of the pieces that prove what they are.
Double knits are the Cinderellas – sitting neglected & never allowed
out to
the quilt shows.
I’ve got a double knit grandmother’s flower puff quilt Mom made from
her
scraps. It would smother young children & small pets! Each hexagon
is
individually stuffed & then they are whip stitched together. I’m not
sure if
she used polyester stuffing or old stockings. When she loaded it
into my
truck last summer, she gave me the additional hexagons that are
supposed to
be added to make it bigger. (Don’t tell her, but THAT won’t happen in
my
lifetime).
In my literature collection, I have a copy of Puff Quilts written in
the 70’s
that expained how to make quilts like this one (and several other
‘classic’
quilt patterns) using this stuff & whip technique.
Janet Bronston
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 06:09:59 -0600 | From: Marcia Kaylakie <marciark@>
Well, are we going to neglect the other wonder fabrics? I have a
qiana and
polyester doubleknit quilt from the seventies and, get this, it was
one
of a pair! this beauty practically slithers out, stands up and
waves at
the audience when I use it in my lectures! Alwasy a crowd pleaser!
Also, what does the Sunbonnet Sue garden ornament with the flailing,
windmill arms signify…one shudders to think! Marcia in absolutely
frigid
Austin, Texas, where it is about 10 degrees right now!
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 07:59:33 -0600 | From: “leigh/hcquilts” <hcquilts@>
> When we contrast the almost limitless information resources
available to
> present day historians and the very limited sources available to
writers
of
> nearly one hundred years ago, it is not a difficult task to locate
errors
or
> discrepancies in their works. .
I’m baffled by this statement, which to me seems contrary to logic.
Can
you
please explain to me how researchers have MORE information about a
subject
the FARTHER they get away from the date of origin? Your premise may
be
true
regarding data recovered from archaelogical digs, but when it comes
to
primary sources – e.g. newspapers, household records, actual
examples of
textiles and other items that deteroriate or are usually discarded
and,
most
importantly, *firsthand accounts*, I’d have to disagree.
What *is* available today, however, is many more books on a
particular
subject written for the average reader. Unfortunately, since the
information they contain is distorted by the quality of research and
political agenda of the author and cultural milieu in which and for
whicih
they are written, they function as yet another filter between us
and the
subject era – hardly as accurate as primary sources. This is
particularly
true in the case of “oral histories” which, as in the old children’s
game
of
“Telephone,” tend to become less and less accurate the more they are
passed
on: grassroots revisionism.
Early-20th-century popular women’s magazine articles on quilting
history
should be considered in light of the period’s popular culture in the
same
way that “French” recipies in these same magazines of the 1950s
should be
considered accurate representations of French cuisine. Beginning in
the
late 19th century and continuing with varying degrees of enthusiasm
through
the 20th, Colonial America was home decor’s nostalgie du jour. The
concept
of patchwork quilting as an “Early American” craft fit in
conveniently with
that idea, allowing a woman to make a “Colonial-style” quilt to go
with her
new “Colonial-style” neo-Sheraton bedroom set in her cavernous
“Colonial
Revival” house. The same is true for the “cottage industries” you
mention:
the pop culture fed off the crafts, and vice versa, ad infinitum.
“Amish”
quilts manufactured today for resale are a classic example. How
much do
they have to do with the original quilts, or the culture that gave
birth to
them?
I don’t dispute your statement that Lardge’s and Elizabeth
Daingerfield’s
magazine articles were ” landmark influences in the early 20th
century’s
recognition of the value of America’s Appalachian cultural
heritage”.
However, being an “influence” in recognizing a culture’s value and
providing
an historically accurate account must not be confused. “Braveheart”
(the
movie) was influential in arousing popular interest in Scottish
culture,
but
by any stretch of the imagination it was not a scholarly work, nor
does it
being the only source of information popularly available make it any
more
accurate. Writers such as Lardge, Daingerfield, and Tobin may
deserve
credit for their good intentions, but not for their careful
research.
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 09:06:23 -0600 | From: “Carla Toczek” <CToczek@>
Oh, I couldn’t resist adding some to list:
windsocks: Politcians welcome
plastic, spinning flowers on a stick: Safehouse for gardeners and
grandparents
little red tricycles: Safehouse for stay-at-home moms and circus
clowns
abandoned lawnmowers and orange extension cords: Safehouse providing
free
beer and
big screen t.v. to overly nagged husbands.
Carla in Texas where I didn’t know it could get this cold.
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:26:04 -0500 | From: “Candace Perry” <candace@>
Okay, I just have to add something…
Witches ball or gazing ball.. safe house for Miss Cleo, the poor
benighted
tarot card reader…
Candace Perry
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:28:02 -0600 | From: “Jennifer Van Haaften” <jasvanhaaften@>
I also wanted to add two cents into the fray. This list has been very
active. As a museum educator and historian, I am concerned about
history and
its accuracies and inaccuracies. I would like to applaud everyone who
takes
a critical look at history and is willing to dig a little further to
see
what it is all about.
One course I took, way back in college, “Historians and the
Philosophy of
History” was extremely dry, annoying and made me wonder why we had to
take
it as history majors. Later I found out. The course was meant to show
that
in every age, people look at history differently and write and
rewrite it
according the biases and interests of the times. Hence, “social
history”
(history about the “little people” rather than the “dead white men”)
got a
big boost in the 1960s. Why? Well, what was going on in the sixties
and
seventies? Groups of people questioning authority, wondering why the
individual didn’t count as much, etc, etc (yes, that is the most
simple
version). This happens in every age. The classe also taught that
every
author has a bias and that to learn an author’s background may give
you
insight as to where they’re coming from when they write their
history. We
were also taught to look for footnotes, endnotes, bibliographies to
see how
the research supported the claims in an historical book. From there,
we
could judge the book on its own background and merits and decide what
and
what not to believe.
What’s this have to do with the historical quilt books in general?
Well,
actually, I’m on a little soap box. I would like to encourage more
people,
like you are doing, to debate histories and to explore for themselves
the
reasons behind why a book is written to determine whether a history
book is
more objective or subjective, whether the points they make are backed
up by
evidence or are merely conjecture. There is too much information in
the
world and much of it can be wrong (especially the internet) and I
feel
children and adults need to be critical readers. Do I sound cynical?
Maybe,
but it would help a lot of problems if more people examined the
information
coming into their lives instead of taking it at face value. There’s a
lot of
good information out there, but we do often have to wade through half
truths, or poorly supported theses.
I would like to charge everyone on this list to continue with their
critical
reading, continue their debates and, *most importantly* spread those
skills
to other people. Many of you are lecturers, consultants, museum
personel,
even business people. We all come in contact with people, and are in
the
position to suggest to others to really think about the information
coming
in. The Underground Railroad, though a noble and fascinating subject,
is by
its nature hard to pin down with accurate facts. Records were not
kept,
people did not admit to participating if they could. Hence we end up
with
stories and oral histories, which cannot be checked against
documented
facts. Something akin to the Betsy Ross story. Betsy Ross did not
make the
first American flag. A descendant 100 years later came up with the
story to
make him and his family sound more important. How many of us learned
that
story in grade school? Yet with a little digging, holes can be found
in that
story.
Thank you for your wonderful debates. I am thinking of picking up in
HIPV
and checking out what it is you’re all talking about.
As side note, I found a few things in Barbara Brackman’s Civil War
quilts
book to be slightly inaccurate. I don’t remember them off the top of
my
head, but I do remember thinking that certain statements perpetuated
beliefs
about that time period that were not true. If you want, I will go
find my
copy and tell you what I think, if you’d like to debate. 😉
Also, to our international friends, this is such a tough subject even
for us
Americans, I applaud you for trying to learn our history. I am sure
there
are many things in your nation’s histories of which I would not be
aware,
nor know right from wrong when I saw it.
One of my friends from Britain visited me and we went to see an
Underground
Railroad exhibit. He was thinking London Underground when he first
viewed
it. Obviously, there was no railroad, nor anybody really underground.
At
that point it occurred to me how different his viewpoint of the world
was.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Van Haaften
Museum Educator
Elmhurst Historical Museum
Elmhurst, Illinois
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:50:20 -0500 | From: “Judy Kelius (judysue)” <judysue@>
I’ve been following the discussion on yucky polyester & other quilts
made
in those “dark days” of quilting with interest. I think it will be a
while
before these become desirable, but who knows? I remember when I first
got
into buying antique quilts about 20 years ago, anything with a lot of
“bubble-gum” pink was often ignored by collectors . . . now they are
especially desirable! And you could buy the 30’s quilts for a song .
. .
now they often sell for as much as 19th century quilts.
I just wanted to point out that there are several books on fabrics of
the
40’s-70’s published by Schiffer Books. They are nostalgic to look at
and
very well done so it’s almost as good as having swatches. Some are
the kind
of fabrics that might appear in quilts, so they make good references.
You
can see what is available by going to www.schifferbooks.com and
searching
on textiles or fabrics.
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 09:30:42 -0800 | From: Laura Robins-Morris <lrobins@>
I own a fabulous quilt from the 70’s. Broken Star pattern, king
sized, perfectly pieced with sharp points, and lays dead flat —
executed in those wonderful neon sherbet colors, orange, lime green
and
lemon yellow — Double Knit polyster — and beautifully quilted in
large but even stitiches (double knit plus batting simply do not
allow
small stitches!). Obvioulsy made by an expert, painstakingly and
accurately. It was purchased for $9.95 at Goodwill. It washed up
like
a dream and is as bright as the day it was made. And it will last
forever 🙂
Is anyone doing a book on 70’s quilts?? It would be interesting to
see
what’s out there. It’s time to bring them out of the closet! And
I’d
love to see this one in a book because it’s a wonderful example of
making do with the fabric that was available and popular at the time.
A
great piece of quilt history.
Friends groan when they see it but I love it!
Laura in Seattle
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 14:01:23 -0500 | From: “laurafisher” <laurafisher@>
There are quilts made with doubleknits and 70s fabrics in Eli Leon’s
book
“Who’d a Thought It” about african american quilting traditions.
Laura
—– Original Message —–
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:58:20 -0600 | From: “Jennifer Van Haaften” <jasvanhaaften@>
Please understand that my comments were not on the merits of the
HIPV. My
comments were applauding the debate around the book and others, as
well as
encouraging you all to get people in our everyday lives to be
critical
readers and thinkers.
Working in museums and working with teaching of all ages, we are
confronted
with many myths, legends, and just plain untrue facts. Many people
would not
perpetuate them if they would only question the possibility that they
may
not be true. On the museum education list serve I belong to, they
were just
discussing dispelling historical myths, such as “People were much
shorter
back then.” (In reality, there has been research to contradict that
point,
or at least verify that people might have been an inch less, but
nothing
drastic.) Yes, I know there is so much information out there, how can
we be
expected to find the truth to everything? Well, we can’t, but we can
encourage ourselves and others to continue to check and question.
Encourage
questions of my child museum visitors, your lecture participants, our
quilt
history list.
This doesn’t just go for history. How many times have you heard
“Medical
research has found that blah, blah, blah” You fill in the blank. The
next
day, week, or month, the news is reporting, “Another study has shown
that
blah, blah, blah doesn’t really work.” To top it off in this day of
quick
information and sound bites, pertinent and useful information is lost
because it is considered to be too detailed.
So go ahead, ask the questions, look for the answers and encourage
others to
do the same. In the end, we have to make up our own opinion and act
upon
that, regardless of what others say.
Thank you for listening to my 2 cents. Though it may not be worth
that even.
Jennifer Van Haaften
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 13:24:02 -0600 | From: Laura Hobby Syler <texas_quilt.co@>
If you have the urge to check out HIPV…please borrow it from
someone
who has already paid the price!!! Let’s not encourage the publisher
by
making another sale….
Now my main question is…as members of the quilt history community
who
are aware of the fallacies of this doorstop…does anyone have any
good
ideas as to how to combat this spread of mis information???
Anyone up to talking to O’Riley on Fox News??? He loathes people who
want to re-write history for what ever reason.
Laura
In frigid N. Texas where they “say” we are to get back up to 50
today…22 this AM.
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:05:24 EST | From: CBENBERRY@
As a grad school major in history many years ago, and with an
unrelenting
practise since, history research is almost second nature to me. I
am well
aware of the value of primary artifacts and sources in conducting
historical
research. I am also aware that when primary sources are unavailable,
the
methodology requires the consultation of secondary sources. Yet it
is
usually not an either or situation that confronts us in our research
efforts.
That instead most creditable research involves a mixture; the use of
both
primary and secondary sources. The role of oral history in research
is far
too complex to give a brief simplistic reply here.
Even when dealing with primary sources as artifacts, the original
researcher
acts as a filter as she interprets her findings. Artifacts such as
you
mentioned- newspapers, household accounts, examples of cloth – are
just
that, isolated objects, until they are placed in context and the
researcher
interprets their relevance to a particular study. Once she
produces her
findings, she is the first filter. Are her findings always
necessarily
correct? So your premise that secondary sources have been distorted
by the
quality of the research, political agenda of the author, and the
cultural
milieu may be true, but the filtering process has been in place
since the
beginning. Primary artifacts such as you mentioned may have a
monetary
value to a dealer in antiques. For a researcher of quilt history,
their
value relates directly to how well she is able to interpret them in
her study.
Your statement that Lardge, Daingerfield and Tobin may deserve credit
for
their good intentions but not for their careful research, I find most
distressing and condescending. Is this another example of a few
present
day quilt history researchers who believe that only they, who follow
the
academic model, can be considered true researchers? That persons from
the
early times can be dismissed as unworthy to be called researchers?
That
their works have more in common with the 20th century’s popular
films, fads
and fancies? What do you know about Lardge and Daingerfield? Those
were the
persons I cited in my QHL message. Have you studied these women?
I have,
especially Daingerfield, and that brief citation about her in my
message does
not begin to give a complete picture of the woman and her efforts. I
could
name other women of the early 20th century who deserve credit for
being quilt
history researchers.
I have loved quilt history for nearly 50 years. I glory in the
continued
fine efforts of present day quilt history researchers, and I believe
a
stupendous body of information is being accumulated that will be of
benefit
for many years to come.
Many years ago, I wished but did not dare believe that quilt history
would
some day find a place in the academy. I am happy to say I have lived
long
enough to see that wish partially fulfilled. My immediate hope is
as quilt
history gains stature and acknowledgement in the wider community of
America, that the pioneer quilt history researchers, mostly early
20th
century women, will not be a casualty of any present day elitism.
We cannot
let those women be denied their rightful place of honor. They have
often
provided the base upon which current quilt scholarship is built.
One last remark-your questioning of my statement that present day
historians
have unlimited resources- I need to introduce you to some of my
friends who
are experts at surfing the internet. It is absolutely unbelievable
how much
historical information/ quilt-related and otherwise is out there-
it’s
astounding and never-ending.
Cuesta Benberry
CBENBERRY@
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:09:59 EST | From: CBENBERRY@
A couple of years ago when I first subscribed to the QHList, a very
heated
conversation about quilts, the Underground Railroad and the book
Hidden in
Plain View was being conducted. After reading several issues of the
list, I
decided I would not participate in the discussion although I had
written an
Introduction for the book. I knew my personality would not fit in
with the
kind of discussion I was reading. I am an adherent of the old
school, calm,
let us reason to-gether kind of debate. So evidently were some of
the other
subscribers who joined in the debate. But I was appalled because it
appeared to me the discussion was being dominated by still other
persons who
were intemperate and caustic in their comments, overly emotional, at
times
almost hysterical in their criticisms of the book. Misstatements
were made,
assumptions that had no basis in reality were proferred as fact.
Criticisms
came from readers who admitted they had not actually read the book.
There
were even false statements about my role in the writing of HIPV. But
it was
the tone of the discussion that was so off-putting to me. Certainly
one
could expect controversy about the subject and its presentation and I
knew I
could deal with that. I also knew I had no place in what was turning
out to
be an acrimonious, disagreeable quarrel. So I just sat and read what
others
wrote. HIPV is not the first quilt history text to have
controversial
contents. I wondered why had this book aroused such passion, such
intense
responses, such anger, such furor? What was that about?
Now the discussion about HIPV and the Underground Railroad is being
debated
again on QHL. I’ll stick by my first decision to just read what
other
subscribers write., with one caveat. I’ll answer Lisa Evans message
about
the “silly lawn jockeys” because that information appeared in my
Introduction
to HIPV. Once answered, I’ll disappear back into lurkdom without
any more
particpation in the HIPV debate on QHL. By the way, I have had
private
discussions with friends who were critical of HIPV, but they were the
same
type as I- the calm, let us reason together folk. After our
friendly
discussions, did anyone become less critical? I suspect not but, by
golly,
we certainly listened to each other, and reviewed each others
viewpoints,
step by step, without any anger or animosity. I know friends who
said
they’d unsubscribed for awhile because of the bitter turn of events
of that
HIPV discussion on QHL.
For Lisa Evans,
Your statement that lawn jockeys are a 20th century suburban item is
not
true if you mean their ORIGIN is 20th century. Their popularity
has
lasted into the 20th century. The jockey figures date back to the
early 19th
century . Citations of their role during pre-Civil War days as
markers on
the Underground Railroad escape routes
have been published. If interested in reading the published material
where I
got the information, if you will send me your address, I will mail
photocopies of it to you.
Cuesta Benberry
CBENBERRY@
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:32:42 -0600 | From: “leigh/hcquilts” <hcquilts@>
> Even when dealing with primary sources as artifacts, the original
researcher
> acts as a filter as she interprets her findings. Artifacts such as
you
> mentioned- newspapers, household accounts, examples of cloth – are
just
> that, isolated objects, until they are placed in context and the
researcher
> interprets their relevance to a particular study. Once she
produces
her
> findings, she is the first filter. Are her findings always
necessarily
> correct? ….>….the filtering process has been in place since
the
beginning.
Let’s distinguish between different sorts of “findings”: (a)
reporting pure
data found in a primary source, (b) citing data found in secondary
sources,
and (c) making conclusions based on that data. Failing an error in
transcription or a primary source which itself contains errors (a
census
misstates a person’s age), such “findings” as (a) are indeed
“necessarily
correct”. In the case of (b) the “findings” are only as good as the
reliability of their sources. For that reason, one or two sources
alone,
particularly secondary sources, are simply not sufficient to make any
conclusion at all, any more than interviewing my son about me would
allow
the researcher to draw any conclusions regarding 20th century
quilters.
Just as the researcher who draws statistcal conclusions should
qualify her
words to indicate the limits of the available data, one who draws
social or
conclusions should be particularly careful that her sources are
numerous
enough to support her premise, and should distinguish for the reader
between
data and her own conclusions. Indeed, “filtering” always exists to
some
degree or another. It is therefore up to the responsible researcher
to
report third- and fourth-hand information as just that: hearsay,
rather
than claiming it as fact simply because there isn’t any other
information at
hand; and to qualify her conclusions by using words such as
“probably,”
“possibly”, and “perhaps”.
> Primary artifacts such as you mentioned may have a monetary
> value to a dealer in antiques. For a researcher of quilt history,
their
> value relates directly to how well she is able to interpret them in
her
study.
The idea that primary sources are “valuable” only insofar as the
particular
researcher can “interpret” them seems pretty dangerous to me, as it
invites
conclusions such as “I can’t understand X, so I’ll just ignore it” –
and
allows the author to edit out what doesn’t “fit”.
>Your statement that Lardge, Daingerfield and Tobin may deserve
credit for
> their good intentions but not for their careful research, I find
most
> distressing and condescending. Is this another example of a few
present
> day quilt history researchers who believe that only they, who
follow the
> academic model, can be considered true researchers? That persons
from the
> early times can be dismissed as unworthy to be called researchers?
That
> their works have more in common with the 20th century’s popular
films,
fads
> and fancies?
Unless their statements are based on something other than hearsay,
no,
someone who doesn’t follow the academic model is not a “true
researcher”,
but a disseminator of information which may or may not be factual.
I’d
hardly call expecting careful methodology “condescending.” Perhaps
there
is a different standard in some circles, but even as a college
freshman I
would’ve been dragged through a keyhole backwards if I hadn’t
followed that
tedious academic model..
> My immediate hope is as quilt
> history gains stature and acknowledgement in the wider community
of
> America, that the pioneer quilt history researchers, mostly early
20th
> century women, will not be a casualty of any present day elitism.
We
cannot
> let those women be denied their rightful place of honor. They have
often
> provided the base upon which current quilt scholarship is built.
I’d say any “stature and acknowledgment in the wider community of
America”
that is based on misinformation is utterly worthless. Expecting
facts to
be supported with reliable documentation and conjecture to be
described as
such is not “elitist” except, perhaps, in the eyes of those who don’t
want
their claims questioned and who hope to silence skeptics with such an
accusation.
> One last remark-your questioning of my statement that present day
historians
> have unlimited resources- I need to introduce you to some of my
friends
who
> are experts at surfing the internet. It is absolutely unbelievable
how
much
> historical information/ quilt-related and otherwise is out there-
it’s
> astounding and never-ending.
I would agree with you that much of it is indeed “astounding”,
although
probably not in the way you mean. For those who consider the
internet
reliable, I’ve got some “medical information” sites you may find
helpful.
As anywhere else, what you find on the internet is only as accurate
as the
source from which it comes. Just because you see it on your PC, or
on TV,
or read it in a highly-publicized book doesn’t mean that it’s true.
That’s
where critical thinking comes in.
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 10:21:04 +1100 | From: Lorraine Olsson <sven@>
I have only been collecting old quilts for such a short time when
compared with many of you on the list (7 years) but I feel I have a
very nice example of American quilts from most decades from about
1860
to 1950.
Some of the quilts are very utilitarian but there are a couple of
“blinders”. I consider myself very lucky and privileged to have these
quilts in my possession and care.
When I started looking at old quilts, I thought I had to collect from
the 1800s, or the 1930s. Well that was for about a week :o}}}
I discovered the quilts of the 1940 and 50s were often just as nice,
and
usually much less expensive. Then I saw the fabrics.
I really love the conversation prints from the 1950s (we had some of
these fabrics here in Oz when I was a child), and I particularly like
quilts which have Cowboy and Indian prints in them. My brother was
the
best little cowboy, so nostalgia reigns here.
There are some fabulous feedsacks that have these prints so I also
have
feedsack quilts on my must have list.
But I have no desire for Polyester quilts. Maybe this is from my
rebelliousness of the late 60s and 70s, when my mother was carefully
cutting wildly coloured hexagons and English paper piecing them into
what I considered gaudy monsters.
I have one of her Hexagon Monsters in my cupboard, and I love it
because
it was made by my mother, but I will leave the others for you all to
collect. Mother is now almost 80 and has just stopped making quilts.
Every one she made was either a huge single , or a massive double,
and
had a poly sheet for the backing. I asked her to count up how many
she
has made this way. Close to 30 she thinks. Most were given to family
members, but every bed in her house has one over it. Pretty amazing
huh.
On another note, to Cuesta, please join in more often. I for one want
to
learn from people with your knowledge and experience.
Cheers, Lorraine in Oz
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 18:38:09 EST | From: QuiltNews@
If one were planning a trip to Hong Kong and London, what might be a
must for
a quilt collector to see….Thanks Ann (Quiltnews@)
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:46:29 -0700 | From: Jennifer Hill <jennifer.hill@>
I started quilting in the early ’70’s and I’ll admit that I have made
several verrrry ugly quilts, but not necessarily of that era. I
remember as a teenager, visiting at my aunt’s house once, and she had
a quilting frame set up in her living room. She handed me a thimble
and needle, and I was hooked. The two most important things she
imparted to me, based on her extensive quilting experience were 1)
Using a sewing machine for any part of the quiltmaking process was
CHEATING, and 2) Polyester batting was the greatest thing ever
invented.
I still have my first quilt, and it really isn’t too yucky, although
the only cotton in it is the quilting thread. It is a “biscuit”
quilt, the pattern for which I must have found in a magazine. I used
all “silky” fabrics, which included a lot of poly lining materials,
also several silk scarves and hair ribbons my Mom had worn when she
was little.
One style that the quilters in my family were perpetrating back then,
were wholecloth quilts made with pastel brushed nylon. You know the
stuff, often used for nighties and such. It came off the bolt 108″
wide, and of course we used poly battings inside. Although I
remember my mom, aunts, and I making at least a dozen of them, I
wonder how widespread the “trend” was, considering I never knew any
quilters outside of my own family.
Jennifer Hill
Calgary, AB
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 19:39:30 -0800 | From: “Mindy Sharp” <Mindy@>
I am interested in learning about quilting/quilters along the Oregon
Trail. I have no idea where to start learning about this area. I appreciate any and all help
Mindy
When life gives you scraps, stitch a quilt.
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 21:36:51 -0800 | From: Gaye Ingram <GIngram@>
> Many years ago, I wished but did not dare believe that quilt
history would
> some day find a place in the academy. I am happy to say I have
lived long
> enough to see that wish partially fulfilled. My immediate hope is
as quilt
> history gains stature and acknowledgment in the wider community
of
> America, that the pioneer quilt history researchers, mostly early
20th
> century women, will not be a casualty of any present day elitism.
We cannot
> let those women be denied their rightful place of honor. They have
often
> provided the base upon which current quilt scholarship is built.
Our recent discussions have reminded me of something the late Albert
Einstein wrote: “A hundred times every day I remind myself that my
inner and
outer life depend on the labors of other men, living and dead, and
that I
must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have
received
and am still receiving.”
When I first came to quilting, I was a young doctoral student in
literature,
married to a doctoral student in history. I lived in libraries. I
understood
tools and methods of research, was tenacious as a researcher, and had
access
to good libraries.
Yet it was Carrie Hall, Rose Kretsinger, Ruth Finley, Rose Wilder
Lane, and
Scioto Danner on whom I had to depend for information about quilting.
Through daily use I literally memorized “The Romance of the Patchwork
Quilt”
(I still know page numbers for most quilts pictured in that book)
and wore
out a set of Mrs. Danner’s pattern books.
I would not trade that introduction for anything, though at the time
I would
have given my cherished 1752 copy of Milton’s Minor Poems for one
book like
“Quiltmaking in America: Beyond the Myths,” “Kansas Quilts &
Quilters,” or
“Quilts in Community.”
These early books confirmed something I had sensed growing up in a
family
where the quilting tradition had skipped a generation—namely, that
quiltmaking was an important way in which women had spoken publicly
and that
in some cases quilts were the only records of women¹s voices. The
very
existence of the books confirmed the worthiness of quiltmaking as an
object
of serious historical and cultural study. In them, I still feel the
pulsing
spirit that created and sustained this remarkable art as well as the
passion
that has propelled researchers to study it.
Later, work like that done in the 70¹s by Roland Freeman on
African-American
quiltmaking spurred me to new considerations. A Southerner, I had
been
nurtured mainly by Midwesterner quiltmakers, and I saw in Freeman¹s
exhibits
and the Kentucky Quilt project an exciting validation of my own
region¹s
contribution to this rich American tradition.
To say that these pioneering studies of quilts contained some
questionable
generalizations and conclusions is only to belabor the obvious. Yet
to
criticize without acknowledging their important contributions and
noting the
limitations under which these early quilt historians worked is to
misrepresent truth and to dishonor those whose foundational work kept
alive
the study of quilt history.
Anyone who attempted a serious investigation of a quiltmaker or
quiltmaking
in the 1960¹s and early 1970¹s can readily answer the question asked
rhetorically by a member of this list—² how [can] researchers have
MORE
information about a subject the FARTHER they get away from the date
of
origin?² Such a question might as easily have been asked in
Renaissance
Europe about the history and literature of Greece, for men had far
more
information about Homeric Greece in 1600 than in 1400.
At issue is not the existence of information, but the availability
and
accessibility of information. When I was prowling the libraries of
UGA, UNC,
and Duke in the late sixties, one sorted through unlabeled and
uncataloged
boxes of women¹s journals, photographs, family histories—if she was
lucky
enough to locate such. Many WPA records, including slave narratives,
were
unindexed and available only a few hours daily. Many were not
available.
Detailed information on individual African-Americans was effectively
nonexistent. Information on textiles was scattered and incomplete
even in
textile-producing states. Only a few newspapers existed on microfilm,
and
holdings in these were woefully incomplete. Today, one can walk into
those
libraries and quickly pull up a wealth of such materials. In fact,
UNC has
made many journals and WPA interviews available on the Internet. And
it
bears note that while it was relatively easy in the early seventies
to
secure funding for a research trip to the Folger Library to study
17th-century British meditational literature, it was well-nigh
impossible to
secure funding for a research trip to the Library of Congress to
study some
aspect of American quilting.
All this is not to suggest we take an uncritical attitude toward such
issues
as quilts and the Underground Railroad—or any other issue, for that
matter. Far from it. But all scholarship and learning thrives best in
a
respectful, positive climate, one in which we assume that those who
reach
different conclusions proceed to them from motives as high and
disinterested
as our own. Such assumptions make rational discourse and advancement
of
knowledge possible. Nothing is more hostile to learning than
self-righteousness or condescension.
If we are seriously interested in combating popular misinformation
about
quilts and the Underground Railroad, we can do that in many positive
ways.
My guess is that a film on the order of Horton¹s Quilting Myths and
Beyond
could find funding from a variety of sources. It certainly ought to
be an
easy sell to public television channels and HGTV. I bet magazines
like
³Country Living² would be interested in articles on such topics. And
on a
more local level, I repeat a question I¹ve asked before: anybody
remember
teach-ins? No doubt schools and teachers would welcome such a
presentations
in their classrooms. Then there are all those internet sites that
currently
perpetuate what many regard as erroneous information.
But the subject of the UGRR also gives us on this list the
opportunity to
explore seriously many important issues—-e.g., the propriety of
various
methods of research and interpretation, the relationship of Myth and
history/myth and truth, the effects of politics on quilt scholarship,
trends
in scholarship. But such discussions require a round table, not a
pulpit.
Personally, I hope that C. Benberry would be a welcome guest at such
a table
and that the pictures of Mesdames Hall, Kretsinger, Lane, et al would
smile
down on us in pride from this room.
With good wishes from North Louisiana where we are piling quilts on
our beds
in this cold weather,
Gaye
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 20:14:36 -0800 | From: “Christine Thresh” <christine@>
I have a dumb but honest question. How are the polyester battings and
the
quilt tops that encase them holding up? Nowadays I often hear solemn
pronouncements that it is “bad” to use poly batting because it will
eventually wear away the quilt fabric. Would it just wear away cotton
fabric? If the double knit quilts with poly batting are still going
strong
perhaps it is because that fabric is so strong. Quilters often make
firm
statements about the dangers of using poly-cotton thread too. Are
these new
wives tales?
I use only cotton thread, but I have made a few quilts (wall size)
with
polyester batting.
Christine Thresh
on an island in the California Delta
http://www.winnowing.com
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 18:54:59 +1100 | From: Lorraine Olsson <sven@>
Hello Christine,
I know about poly batting. YuK!!
It is great for a short time, but after a while, the surface develops
nasty
little balls, pills, I guess they are. Over time these act like steel
wool (pot
scrubbing style) and wear holes in your fabrics.
The worst example I have seen of this , was a beautiful 1890s quilt
top, that
had been tied over poly batting and backed with a poly cloth. The top
had
completely lost one block, another 4 or 5 were tissue thin, and the
rest were
almost as bad.
It was a Schoolhouse quilt, and I knew some of the damage when I
bought it, but
it was so sad to see it this way.
By the way, the poly backing was fine….
I hope I have helped,
Lorraine in Oz
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 09:45:25 -0500 | From: “Candace Perry” <candace@>
Good morning fine listers!
I wanted to post a report on a quilt cleaning project plus ask for
some
info.
Awhile back I asked for suggestions on cleaning our white on white
1838
quilt that had what I believed were old water stains along the edges.
We
tried to spot clean, and that of course did not work, and then
decided to
take that big step into the abyss and wash the whole darn thing. This
past
Tues — it was warm here in PA — we dunked the quilt (very careful
dunking,
I might add) in a mixture of water and a cup or so of Zout. We let
it sit
for about 30 minutes, drained the tub (we used a large storage bin)
and then
used a hose with low pressure to rinse it in the tub. After rinsing
and
dumping several times, the quilt was VERY CAREFULLY slid out of the
tub onto
clean white sheets, , spread out, and laid in the sun for a few hours
until
the weather looked ominous. The results were splendid, the quilt
looks
extraordinarily healthy, and I am thrilled. I am fairly certain this
method
would not have sat well with conservators, but we are a poor but
proud
group, and I wanted to exhibit this quilt!
Now my second questions: can anyone recommend a source on white on
white
quilts, or does anyone know of any others that are specifically PA
German,
or maybe PA Quaker or English, that would date from around 1838? I
would
love some comparatives on this.
Thanks, Candace Perry Schwenkfelder Library & Heritage Center
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 08:43:51 -0600 | From: Laura Hobby Syler <texas_quilt.co@>
Lorraine is right!
I too own a wonderful 1890’s top – bow tie – that I bought in the
1980’s when I owned my quilt shop. I had a staff of 18 women all over
the country doing hand quilting for me and my customers. I personally
had at least 10 quilt tops quilted. Polyester batting was new to the
consumer market, and quilters who had to suffer through the dense
sticky
cotton batting were purchasing polyester batting by the cases. Not
only
did the needle glide through the poly fibers, but it was light weight
and still offered great insulation. Pilling was/is a problem…but we
combated that by showing customers the difference when “good quality
quilt shop material” was used vs. “wal-mart-ish fabrics”. One thing
that
has really given these old tops-newly quilted with poly batting the
death sentence was that we were under the impression that since the
poly
batting did not migrate when washed like cotton battings, we could
quilt
up to 6 inches apart, (or even tie) and outline by-the-piece quilting
became the standard quilting design. (Now we know that the shifting
of
the fabric over the batting causes lots of problems). Because most
of
these quilts are “minimally quilted” the more shifting that occurs
between the batting and fabric lets the batting work like that
kitchen
scouring pad…wearing the quilt from the inside out. Not to mention
that you are often dealing with fabrics that are already 100 years
old
or more. We used the bow tie quilt minimally…on the sofa to snuggle
under only when it got really cold (remember I’m in N. Texas) and it
became the “comfort quilt” when either of the girls got sick. Now it
is
relegated to a shelf only to be drug down when I do a lecture on
quilt
care.
About Poly and poly/cotton thread….. as a quilt restoration
specialist….I’ve seen way too many quilts come my way that were
made
in the 70’s to mid 90’s that were stitched with poly or poly/cotton
thread where the thread has literally sliced the fabric. Non sewers
have
called me (one in tears) because they discover what appears to be a
slice on the quilt. One person was convinced that her MIL had
attacked
the quilt on the guest bed during a recent visit…quilt made by
owners
mother…(ya’ think the MIL’s didn’t quite see eye to eye???<G>)
Within
seconds of our meeting I could tell her that her MIL had not done the
deed…it was the thread that it was quilted with, and it would
continue
to happen all over the quilt.
on another note: silk thread and appliqué…..
There have been several discussions on the appliqué digest and among
appliqué artists and the quilt restoration community about the
damages
of silk thread doing the same sometime down the road to cotton
fabrics.
Though the silk thread is very fine and comes in sooooo many
wonderful
colors, it is still many times stronger than cotton and, well, as
long
as it takes me to do an appliqué project…I don’t want to take any
chances.
There are still appropriate times to use poly batting…children’s
quilts that you expect to be drug around and loved to death…or that
quilt that’s going off to college for the first time. Save the
heirloom
work for materials “of like and kind”.
Laura
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 09:44:34 -0600 (Central Standard Time) | From: Mary Persyn <Mary.Persyn@>
In one of yesterday’s posts, someone questioned the
following statement of Cuesta’s.
“When we contrast the almost limitless information
resources available to present day historians and the very
limited sources available to writers of nearly one hundred
years ago, it is not a difficult task to locate errors or
discrepancies in their works.”
I’d like to comment on Cuesta’s statement from the point of
view of my profession- that of librarian. When I read
Cuesta’s statement I immediately agreed with her. The old
primary sources were out there, somewhere, at the beginning
of the 20th century. However, if you didn’t live near the
repository of those resources, or had friends/acquaintances
who could track down those sources for you, you might not
have known that the even existed, and you would have had
considerable difficulty locating them.
It wasn’t until, if I remember correctly, around the time
of the WPA and the great depression that lists of resources
began to be compiled in any regularized way. It really
wasn’t until the founding of the Ohio College Library
Center (OCLC) circa 1970 that information about materials
located in libraries and museums became easily available to
the average scholar through computerization. (OCLC has
grown far beyond Ohio and is now an online database of
materials located in institutions worldwide. Last I heard
it contained records of over 50 million books, periodicals,
archival collections, realia, and lately, web sites). For
example, if you lived in South Carolina at the beginning of
the 20th century and needed to find out information in
Indiana newspapers, you might have guessed that the
Indianapolis Public Library would have what you wanted, and
you would write to them and ask. You then had to travel to
Indianapolis to consult the materials in paper or find
someone to do the work for you. Today you would borrow the
microfilm of the newspaper through interlibrary loan,
having located it through OCLC, and be able to consult it
at your local library. This is a simple example of the
changes that have occurred during the 20th century.
This does not even take into consideration the digitization
projects, such as the American Memory project at Library of
Congress, that are making primary materials available over
the internet.
My .02 for the day.
Mary (whose profession has changed astronomically in the 33
years she has been in it)
Mary Persyn (219) 465-7830
Email: Mary.Persyn@
Law Librarian
School of Law
Valparaiso University
Valparaiso, IN 46383
FAX: (219) 465-7917
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 11:22:42 -0500 | From: Newbie Richardson <pastcrafts@>
Dear list,
I think that when we examine the quilts of the 3rd quarter of the
20th c. we need to remember 2 things.
– that period is only one generation removed from our own ( a
generation being some 25/30 years) so we need to be aware of the
cultural baggage we bring to any research. For instance many of books
on
the late Victorian period written in the 1920’s reflect the authors’
distaste for the period. Or those books written on the “colonial”
period
in the 1890’s reflect the past through rose colored glasses.
– I generally divide quilts from this period into two groups:
“survivals” and “revivals”. This is the same distinction used in
classifying antique furniture.
Survivals include the quilts my mother-in -law made. She was from
the
mountains of far southwest Virginia. She and her daughters ALWAYS
quilted. It was considered part of providing for your family. Many
of
the girls (she had 9 kids) worked in the mills of North Carolina, and
brought home the cuttings – many of poly double knit. They used the
materials that were available at the time. The fact that she brought
great skill and intuitive design ability to her quilts was
incidental.
The family was poor and rural, money – even in the ’60’s and 70’s –
was
a scarce commodity. In the same way, cabinet makers have continued
to
make furniture in the same style for many generations of woodworkers.
Revivals, like those we study from the 1920’s and ’30’s,
reinterpret
designs from the past.
“Survials” continue a tradition using readily available materials
and
traditional knowledge. “Revivals” try to recapture the past in a
different era, inevitably bringing current cultural precepts to the
design. Think of the white on white designed fabrics that many
quilters
use in their “historic” quilts, or the pastel color palette in those
designs of the 1930’s. Those of us working in the field of historic
interiors know how hard it has been to get people to stop
interpreting
18th and 19th c interiors with “conversational chair groupings” – a
product of the central heating and electric lighting of the 20th c.
Both “survivals” and “revivals” are of interest to the material
cultures historian. There is one way in which these quilts are the
same
as those that went before: there are just as many crappy ones, ok
ones,
and great ones as existed in the past! Not everyone is a good
designer/technician – nor was their ancestor! Just because an
artifact
is old, does not mean that it should be venerated! I would hate to
think
that my descendants would venerate one of those crochet toilet paper
covers done in acrylic yarn from the 60’s/70’s!( Talk about cultural
baggage!)
Newbie
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 12:45:34 -0500 | From: “judygrow” <judygrow@>
About White-on-white quilts……..
Many of you know I own a picture frame store and always have a quilt
hung in
the space behind the cash register. I am becoming known as the Quilt
Lady
hereabouts, and folks are starting to come in once a month just to
see the
new quilt every time I change the one hung. I am always inviting
them to
bring in their family quilts and I’d be able to tell them about them
and
give them hints on storage, cleaning, and hanging.
Last week TWO customers finally did bring in a quilt each to find out
about.
One is a wonderful silk throw from the 1890’s in the Arkansas
Traveler
pattern. See
http://cva.morehead-st.edu/culture/crafts/quilts/LL-0055.html
for a sample of the block.
The quilt that I saw was foundation pieced on muslin, all in bright
silks
and brocades (really jewel colors) with the center rectangle in each
block
just a plain black silk. I think the backing fabric may not have
been real
silk, but silk substitute (rayon). The top was in wonderful
condition with
only one fabric used in a couple of places just starting to split.
The
customer who brought it in was a man in his late 30’s who actually
chose it
as his special remembrance of his aunt when her household was broken
up.
The second was an older woman with whom I spent well over an hour and
a
half. What she brought in was a heart stopper! Even my son was
intrigued
with her quilt. It was all white, beautifully drawn, incredibly
quilted and
highly stuffed. It is 95 x 102, made of three lengths of fabric sewn
together. I could feel that the seams were very narrow so I assumed
they
were selvedge to selvedge which makes sense for the width of the
quilt.
The design was a medallion with a basket of flowers in the center
surrounded
with a flowering/fruiting vine border, sprays in the open areas, and
another
vine/feather border with grapes and what I thought were pineapple
fruit (or
could be pine cones) around the outer edge. The basket is quite low
and
broad, quilted to resemble woven splints. I remember seeing printed
fabrics
in a quilt at AQSG in Williamsburg with the same basket form. The
technique
that makes me think of pine cones or pineapples is that after the
shapes in
the larger form were stuffed a couple of stitches were taken into the
center
of each to make an indentation.
The backing is a much more loosely woven fabric, and you could see
how the
design had been stuffed from the back. The background quilting was
in
parallel diagonal rows 1/4″ apart! And there were approximately 12
SPI all
around.
The drawing was absolutely gorgeous, and I so wonder if this wasn’t
drawn by
a professional. Yes, I know that in the 2nd quarter of the 19th
century and
earlier, girls of the gentility were taught to draw, and to paint in
watercolors, but there is a sophistication about the drawing here
that makes
me think it was done by a professional. There is no reason our
quilter
couldn’t have enlarged a design from another source — or taken her
design
from perhaps a Marseilles quilt. Just conjecture on my part.
My customer (in her late 60’s early 70’s) says that she was given the
quilt
in a huge load of linens in the 1980’s when her mother closed up the
big
house to go into a nursing home. She never really knew what it was,
didn’t
ever remember seeing it in her mother’s house, never used it, and
kept it
folded in the linen closet until she came into my store as a
customer,
mentioned having this white thing, and received my invitation to
bring it
in.
She believes it descended in her mother’s family, and her mother was
a
Wistar, a prominent Quaker family from Philadelphia.
(see http://www.haverford.edu/library/special/aids/mbrown/#genealogy
for in
formation on the Wistar family.)
I am hoping that my customer will do some research to find out just
what
line of the Wistar/Wister family she is from and that she can give
that info
to me BECAUSE SHE IS LETTING ME BRING THE QUILT TO THE BIRD-IN-HAND
SEMINAR
in just a couple of weeks! At least that was our understanding when
she
left the store (and took it with her, darn.) Perhaps with
geneological
information we can narrow it down to possible makers.
I tried to get a photo of it, but you know how difficult
photographing a
white quilt can be. It didn’t work at all in the lighting
circumstances.
Because it is so highly stuffed I think a good photo can be taken if
a
strong light is behind it when the photo is taken.
Judy in Ringoes, NJ
judygrow@
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 13:23:45 -0500 | From: Vivien Lee Sayre <vsayre@>
Thank you Cuesta. You have so beautifully stated what so many of us
feel.
Vivien Sayre
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 12:57:32 CST | From: jocelynm@
RE: archives
One thing to keep in mind when viewing the archives, is that people’s
opinions change. Maybe someone believed those statements when she
made
them, but since has changed her mind; maybe someone else has no
memory of
the statement, and cannot reconstruct her thoughts now. It’s very
frustrating to be in either situation and to be ‘called up on the
carpet’
for something you said a year or two ago, which has taken on an
eternal
life in cyberspace.
Another thing is context: maybe that day, someone was having a very
bad
day and her words came off harshly; maybe she was responding to
someone
with whom she had a particularly bad history, and she would have been
less strident and more gracious with someone else.
If you read the archives, fine- but remember that the opinions
expressed
may not be the current opinions of their owners; and please don’t
form
opinions based on comments that their owner may now regret or disown.
Jocelyn
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 14:56:09 -0500 | From: “judygrow” <judygrow@>
Pepper,
Laura Syler reminded me that while I have that early white quilt in
my
possession I should try to trace it off, as you have done. I know
the stuff
that I should buy from Joann’s — the clear plastic table cover or
shower
curtain stuff. I also have mylar by the roll at the store that I
could use,
only 45″ wide.
At 92″ wide I guess I could trace off half on 54″ stuff and then flip
—
except for the center medallion. I am not sure now if both sides are
symmetrical though. Have you joined two pieces to make sure you get
the
entire thing, or overlap, or what? And do I pin through the stuff to
the
quilt to make sure it doesn’t shift?
Even standing at a high carpeted work bench at my store (I have 6 of
them,
each 48 x 96) , I can already feel my back aching from bending over
to work
at it. Maybe I can assign sections to different people to help out.
There’s an awful lot of drawing in this quilt!
Thanks
Judy in Ringoes, NJ
judygrow@
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:52:42 | From: “Ann-Louise Beaumont” <albeaumont@>
Wow! I missed 2 days of QHL and the polyester knit topic-close to my
heart-
came up. When I really started quilting about 10 years ago in
Massachusetts,
I learned what a tabu polyester in general was. Imagine my surprise
when I
saw polyester knit quilts in Quebec! I was told that the Quebec Quilt
Registry documented some in Val-d’Or, way up in the north. These were
Drunkard’s Path quilts. I saw one in La Courtepointe d’Asbestos’ show
in
1996 made by one of our members. That Drunkard’s Path hung so
straight and
true I was in awe. A friend there thought I was probably looking down
my
nose at it and explained to me that people had to use what was
available,
and at that time, 100% cotton fabric was not the easiest to come by.
Often
fabrics in nearby shops were labelled “100% unknown fibre”. I was
able to
honestly say that I was blown away by Marie-Berthe’s technical skill.
I bought a polyester knit at my church’s rummage sale in Danville,
Quebec.
It was a rectangle one patch with solids and really wild prints. The
time
came when I made a quilt for the a challenge sponsored by the
Pocumtuc
Memorial Museum in Deerfield, MA along with the Hands Across the
Valley
Quilt Guild in Amherst. The inspiration for the challenge was a
wonderful
Broken Dishes quilt. I made a number of panels interpreting Broken
Dishes
during the different quarter centuries from 1875-2000, and by
cannibalizing
my Danville top, I made a groovy 60’s-70’s panel. That stuff really
wasn’t
the easiest to work with.
In PEI I saw a basket quilt filled with flowers of crimpolene,with
black
buttonhole appliqué in a show by the St. Mark’s Anglican Church Guild
in
Kensington in their vintage section. This was the first and last time
I have
seen polyester knit used for appliqué.
I used to feel quite the rebel for liking the poly knit quilts, but I
see
I’m not alone anymore.
Best Wishes
Ann-Louise Beaumont in Greeley, CO
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:44:09 -0800 | From: “nms” <nms@>
Thanks for the “wake up call” about research, researchers, sources,
opinions and all the discussion about who knows what and how they
know
it. Could we please limit our discussion of HIPV. It has been
harangued
to death in the past on this list. It was a feisty discussion then
and
still is. I don’t think there is any new twists in the topic. Just
some
new players. Check out the QHL Archives. This discussion is old,
and
has turned mean spirited. And for Cuesta, thanks for remembering to
be
dignified.
Nance Searle
International Society of Appraisers
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:19:19 EST | From: Kittencat3@
This is for list members in the Connecticut Valley…well known area
quilter
and teacher Joann Parisi is fighting malignant melanoma, the
deadliest form
of skin cancer. She’s already had part of a finger amputated (they
originally thought it was psoriasis).
For those who don’t know, Joann is a beloved fixture on the Valley
quilting
scene. Her old shop in West Springfield was a hang-out and classroom
for
many of us in the 80s and early 90s, and her class “Olde is New” was
taken by
hundreds of quilters. She also provided space for classes and
meetings in
the back of her shop.
I don’t have Joann’s e-mail or address, but the owners at Southampton
Quilts
in Southampton, Massachusetts, are selling raffle tickets for a
gorgeous
Northern Star quilt, all proceeds to go to Joann’s medical expenses
(she
doesn’t have health insurance). Tickets are $5. For details, write
to
www.southamptonquilts.com.
Thanks –
Lisa Evans
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:28:03 -0800 | From: Don Beld
Thank you Jennifer Van Haaften and Cuesta Benberry for your
thoughtful
(and I believe correct) comments. I am a little shocked by some of
the
responses to my initial reply tot he inquiries about HIPV. I
certainly
don’t know the truth about Ozella’s story; but I don’t think anyone
else
does, including the authors of the book. I also was trained to be a
historian in college and ones does need to keep an open mind were
possible and to draw conclusion for current facts is acceptable with
the
caveat that later information could alter our perception. I will
adhere
to Cuesta Benberry policy and refrain from further comments on this
subject as it seem futile to try to have a dialogue on it. Don Beld
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 22:20:23 EST | From: KingsCalico@
I am no expert, by here is my theory on why people made polyester
quilts:
My first job, in 1975, was in a fabric store. Polyester fabrics were
new and
our customers, especially older women who were used to ironing
everything,
loved this carefree new fabric. The abundance of all these new
polyester
“scraps” and the scarcity of 100% cotton prints, together with many
of these
women’s “waste-not-want-not Depression bred mentality” (which I still
see in
my pack-rat mother) prompted them to put these polyester scraps to
good use
in the form of utility quilts. Like I said, I am not a historian or
sociologist, but this is just an observation.
Thank you for all the insight and information on this list!
Celine
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:14:13 -0500 | From: “Cinda Cawley” <lrcawley@>
One style that the quilters in my family were perpetrating back then,
were wholecloth quilts made with pastel brushed nylon. You know the
stuff, often used for nighties and such.
In Scranton, PA church lady quilters used “Cuddleskin” as it was
called for
wholecloth quilts. The nightgowns always got pills; I suppose the
quilts
did too.
Cinda on the Eastern Shore
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:32:12 -0500 | From: “Cinda Cawley” <lrcawley@>
Candace asks about PA white on white quilts. The State Museum of
Pennsylvania has a splendid example made by Hannah Welsh circa 1820.
Hannah, of York, PA, married Obediah Dingee of Lancaster Co. in 1823.
This
masterpiece, which measures 108″x106″, might have been her wedding
quilt.
You can see details of the quilt in Saved for the People of
Pennsylvania
(the book that Lorraine Ezbiansky, Denise Nordberg and I wrote about
The
State Museum’s collection) on pages 13, 59, 64 and 66.
Cinda on the Eastern Shore
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 01:20:48 -0500 | From: “judygrow” <judygrow@>
http://www.collphyphil.org/FIND_AID/W/wistarc10a_12.htm
This is the link I meant to send about the Wistar family. From this
short
biography you can see how important this quilt would become if it
could be
linked to this family.
Judy in Ringoes, NJ
judygrow@
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 07:24:10 -0500 | From: “Pat Sloan” <pat@>
What are the thoughts from this group on the poly/cotton blend
battings when
you quilt heavily? I heavily quilt my pieces by machine, but do you
think
the blends will also pill and become rough over time? I do leave
larger
areas, under the applique, which are unquilted to provide depth and
interest.
Which cotton battings are preferred by historians and restoration
projects?
I teach a machine quilting class and I would love to be able to share
with
my students the issues of poly batting, but I do like a few of the
blends
(50/50 by Mountain Mist is one that I use). During the class I show
them
different types of batting and discuss the final effects they produce
when
the piece is quilted.
Also, what are you thoughts on wool and silk for long term use?
Thank you for the wonderful information!
Pat Sloan
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:57:43 -0800 (PST) | From: Judy Schwender <sister3603@>
> were wholecloth quilts made with pastel brushed
> nylon. You know the
> stuff, often used for nighties and such. It came
> off the bolt 108″
> wide, and of course we used poly battings inside.
When I was a fabric/notions sales rep in Idaho &
Montana in the late ’80s, I saw many, many quilts made
in Idaho with the 108″ tricot. Many were tied, in
patterns. There was an outfit in Utah that had
patterns that specifically appealed to the Mormon
population- Temple Square, the Tabernacle. (If anyone
is interested I could find out the name of the
company- it slips my mind at present.) These patterns
were of non-wovens (like interfacing) that had small
holes where the ties were done. You framed the
backing, batting, then the top fabric, then laid this
pattern on top. Then you tied the ties through the
holes. The pattern was lifted off when you were done.
The Mormon aid societies made an incredible number of
quilts (and for all I know, are continuing to do so.)
If a pattern came along that struck their fancy, it
was made over and over and over. (Doubleknits were
also used for these aid quilts since they were so
durable.)
I also saw quite a few stitched tricot quilts that
utilized these same patterns for the designs. Then,
when long-arm quilting machines started becoming more
prevalent, tricot quilts started showing up that were
quilted on those.
You have to admire anyone who can machine quilt a
quilt that has a tricot top and back and polyester
batting! Talk about a slippery quilt sandwich!
I also wonder if the tricot quilts weren’t a very late
version of the boudoir quilts from the first part of
the 20th century?
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:42:32 -0500 | From: “Cinda Cawley” <lrcawley@>
Isn’t it everybody’s dream to pay a winter visit to Buffalo, the
city
that got 7 feet of snow in three days at Christmas? I didn’t see a
single
quilt, but on the way home I happened on a nifty little exhibit in at
the
Roberson Museum in Binghamton, NY. Nine quilts from three
inter-related
families who lived in rural Broome Co. from 1820 to 1920. To quote
from the
brochure “Memories of Braided Lives reconstructs the quilters’ daily
existence and the significance of self expression in lives devoted to
domestic industry.” The exhibit uses oral histories, photographs,
sewing
tools, fabric and furniture to illustrate the lives of women who
probably
seldom traveled more than a few miles from their farm homes. The
oldest
quilt was the most interesting, a framed center made entirely of
different
size squares brought to NY from Connecticut in the first quarter of
the 19th
century. There were a couple of mid-century quilts and the rest
dated from
around 1880 up to 1920. these quilts were made to be used, but they
were in
great shape and the level of skill in construction and quilting was
very
high.
At an antique shop I found a spectacular Princes’ Feather quilt
made in
NE PA (my native turf). It’s a four block; the feathers are cheddar
and
that oxblood brown; in the four corners of each block are shapes that
look
like chicken feet that I suspect were intended to be Fleur de Lis.
The
blocks are framed with scallops of turkey red and cheddar. There’s a
wide
white border quilted with a cable. The quilting in the blocks is
hearts and
leaves in the feathers and the open spaces. All the fabrics are
solid
colors; I’m thinking 1880-1900. The applique is typical of PA
country
applique.
My final treat was at the Schwenkfelder Library where I stopped
to do
some research on my fraktur quilt project. Candace Perry showed me a
wonderful, and very early, crib quilt (four-patches with chintz
setting
blocks in unused condition) which I assume will be part of their
upcoming
exhibit. They have some very nice programming lined up to go along
with the
exhibit (including Barb Garrett and Patricia Keller).
Cinda back on the Eastern Shore
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:45:26 EST | From: Midnitelaptop@
for a little more info on the quilt exhibit
http://www.roberson.org/exhibits.htm
jean L
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:24:34 EST | From: Kathlash@
I found it ironic that someone on the other “listserve” I belong to,
sponsored by ALHFAM (Association of Living History Farms and Museums)
should
bring up the subject of HIPV at the same time we were disussing it.
He was
bemoaning the fact that so many educators have bought into this book,
building curriculums around it, and thereby further embedding it into
the
mainstream of education.
The only reason I bring this hot topic up one more time is to pass on
to
whomever is interested, the website he gave, where a very thoughtul
critique
was written by Giles R. Wright, director of the Afro-American
History
Program of the New Jersey Historical Commission.
http://historiccamdencounty.com/ccnews11_doc_01a.shtml
Kathleen
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:51:22 -0800 | From: “Maureen Flanagan” <flanagan@>
Hi all:
In the last couple of weeks there was some interesting discussion of
the war
between the states and the development and evolution of the textile
industry. I find that I have an extra copy of Gavin Wright’s, “The
Political Economy of the Cotton South: Households, Markets, and
Wealth in
the Nineteenth Century” (Norton 1978). If anyone is interested,
please
contact me OFF-LIST.
Best regards,
Maureen Battistella
Ashland, Oregon
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 17:18:27 -0500 | From: “Cinda Cawley” <lrcawley@>
Speaking of local historical societies, the Chester Co. PA Historical
Society has an exhibit on the Underground RR which continues thru
Dec.
2002. Unfortunately the website isn’t helpful (no information about
content). A couple of years ago I was there for another exhibit and
the
curator told me they were planning to do the UGRR. I brought up the
controversy re. HIPV and he said they were well aware of it. I’ll
get
there at some point and see how (if at all) they handle the topic.
Cinda on the Eastern Shore, birthplace of Harriet Tubman and
Frederick
Douglas.
