|
|
|
|
|
|
by creep
2764 days ago
|
|
|
>I recently read a book in which the author, describing rural life in the early 19th century, casually mentioned clothing as being ‘all made in the home’. I laughed. Anyone who has ever tried to sew anything (let alone make an entire family’s wardrobe by hand) would not be so cavalier about the amount of labour involved. Hmmm, true. Thinking about it, I now realize that whenever I have thought about time-frames pre-industrial revolution, I always just assumed clothing was quick to make. I have an aunt who knits. My mother, who also knits, regards her sister as the best knitter she knows. I've seen her pieces and, while they are something I could never make, they don't have the "flawless" quality of sweaters and such you can buy at the store, and they take sometimes months for her to finish (depending on what else she's doing in her free time). I've therefore always assumed my aunt was kind of medium-tier at knitting. Kind of a silly thing to contemplate. But anyways, I never thought that it was a very long process, or should be, and that the results of hand-knitting should mimic exactly the factory-quality you see at the store. I always just thought women who knit in the "old times" could churn out a sweater or a pair of socks in a couple days, kind of along the same lines as the thought that "everything was better back then". Similarly, when I tried to knit a scarf for my mom for Christmas one year, I gave myself a month (figuring I could work on it for an hour now and then) and I nearly did not make the deadline AND the scarf was uneven AND it wasn't long enough. |
|
|
I imagine a lot more clothes used to be resewn or patched and passed on down to family members rather than new ones always being made.
But I have noticed the same thing as you. People I know who practice knitting, crocheting and sewing can usually makes something pretty quickly and I guess for a lot of people if it was your only option what else arr you going to do other than get fast and good at it.