The method of cascading information about the emergence of newly emergent
sustainable fibres is still not as open as it should be. Matthews (2011) in the introduction of her PhD study, explains that this is because of a long tradition of secrecy in textiles production that stems from commercial security. To overcome the barriers to knowledge about biopolymers, it is necessary to first understand those issues. Commercial textile 9 http://www.georgeweil.com/fact_file/silk.aspx
manufacture thrives on a lack of information about fibres and their origins (Matthews 2011) because of commercial sensitivity. This creates a barrier that prevents designer- makers gaining information about process technologies, the chemical and water
resource use and waste that is generated during textile fibre production. This knowledge is the basis upon which selection of one fibre over another is made when comparing fibres with ecological and sustainable credentials. Jane Taylor commented in chapter 4 on compromises made during production:
You know the other compromise that is made is quality: I mean handle, softness, characteristic....and if that‘s going to stop people buying your product, it does not matter how sustainable your product is, if no one is going to buy it, you are not going to make a difference. So...for me that is really important‘. [Taylor] (chapter 4).
Taylor states that materials selection emerges from a balance of factors: handle and performance characteristics made from tacit and empirical knowledge base. To compare fibres producing huge emissions at raw-material phase to ecological fibres that have a positive impact on the user-phase means that without knowledge of green and white processing methods, designer-makers opt for traditional fibres for quality not eco footprint.
5.9.1 Shared Knowledge of Fibres
Openness and open-design types of practice, as discussed previously in chapter 2, are widely used in the pursuit of sustainable practice (Twigger Holroyd 2013). Openness shares knowledge with other designer-makers about sustainability and in textile practice this may include the aesthetic handle and tacit nature of biopolymers‘ characteristics. During open interviews with designer-makers (chapter 4), I was able to share early knit samples of biopolymer fibres from my practical research. During this exchange,
designer-makers got to handle biopolymers for the first time. This experience and discussion of their handle generated further interest in the fibres and yarns.
There is an expanding range of independent designers and makers, large companies and networked or collaborative projects that maintain control over production,
manufacture and of their designs, Etsy for example provides a online platform bringing together; consumers, producers, artists and makers (Gwilt, 2014:111) This enables participants to be selective about sources and resources and retain control and
transparency in the supply chain, whilst generating growing awareness of ecological products. A further example is Toft Alpaca40. Toft is an alpaca farm and Knitwear Company, that holds workshops and open weekends, offers patterns download online, yarn and tuition for hand knitted kits for garments and soft toys. They maintain an open- discussion blog and promote their practice on Facebook.
Collaborative practice uses online social networking to communicate their eco
credentials and extend their business to domestic crafters beyond their farm. One other aspect of their practice is to attend domestic knit shows such as Knit and Stitch and Wool Fest, which raises their profile in the domestic market. Dairy farmers might be being encouraged to diversify their industry into making cheese, yoghurt and ice-creams but to ask them to extend to Milk PLA (Casein) is not going to happen just yet. The reason is that knowledge and technologies require shared vision, time and investment. Whilst the profiled opportunity to explore a relatively new fibre, to European markets, like alpaca, and is available in small quantities and in so many forms, knowledge of biopolymers is overlooked.
Fisher Mckenna‘s (2012) study, The Case for Casein, examines the problem of
environmental harm caused by global creation use and disposal of garments and makes a case for casein (milk PLA) fibre from waste milk as a unique solution to issues of sustainability through opportunities to develop regional fashion businesses. This model is currently being developed commercially by German fashion designer and chemist Anke Domaske41 (Qmilk). Craft makers diversify their practice and sharing knowledge is also more prevalent. An article by Alison Mayne (2016) Feeling Lonely, Feeling
Connected, highlights the need for sharing:
Additional themes emerge, including the ways that sharing tangible making in knit and crochet online can support an improved sense of agency and self-esteem. The study highlights how both the acts of making and of sharing making online contribute to participants‘ sense of positive wellbeing. (Mayne, 2016)
40 (http://www.toftalpaca.co.uk).pls
Craft networks such as Ravelry42 share patterns and offer practical advice to
participants, an opportunity missed by the Crafts Council43. Poor regional support of textile (and other) craft producers has resulted in the need to share online contribution being met independently by bloggers. Direct communication of achievements and struggles is met with interest by a wide audience. Notable examples of unique and beautifully crafted work include, The Pale Rook44 and successful textile artist Mister Finch45. Blogging feeds interest in the details of their work and creates new horizons of intellect that have been neglected or marginalised but are at the centre of creative impetus. Townsend and Niedderer (2016) discuss the relationship between Craft and Emotional Expression by describing the maker‘s need for experiential knowledge to be evaluated by the success of their practical application:
Eliciting emotional expression through material engagement is one of the key characteristics associated with craft and which is linked to the maker‘s need to acquire experiential knowledge of materials beyond pragmatism. (Townsend and Niedderer, 2016)46
Townsend and Niedderer build on the idea that the makers and user experience of a material is mediated through an embodied form of analysis. The idea that new materials present new emotional and behavioural opportunities (Karana et al 2014) see Table 5-2 for the descriptive categories in materials experience. Creative research in crafts
requires sensibilities in materials and in understanding human values which result in the joining together emotion and knowledge (Townsend and Niedderer 2014). This
completes the circle of creative impetus gained from materials tacit knowledge and haptic sensations that communicate internal, embodied sensorial contact.
42http://www.ravelry.com 43http://www.craftscouncil.org.uk 44https://en-gb.facebook.com/thepalerook/ 45https://www.facebook.com/MisterFinchTextileArt/ 46 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299400167_Craft_and_emotional_Connecting_hrough_material_engagement
Table 5-2 Descriptive categories in materials experience Pittman 2016, (adapted from Karana 2008)