Are We Dumber than Past Quilters?

Have you ever fallen down a rabbit hole and was left shaking your head when you finally clawed your way out?

That happened to me a few weeks ago.  Susan, one of my very best quilting friends, lent me some quilting magazines.  These were magazines from the early 2000’s, so they’re over 20 years old.  The magazine I took a deep dive in was Better Homes and Gardens Century of Quilts (2002).  This was a great magazine, and it traced our quilting history from the 1900’s through to 2000.  In their articles, they would name drop certain pattern designers.  Some of these folks I was aware of (such as Marie Webster) and others I honestly hadn’t heard of before.  One of these women was Anne Orr. 

Anne was a multi-talented textile designer and artist.  She designed patterns for knitting, crocheting, tatting, embroidery, and quilting.  The article mentioned she published a book of eight projects in 1944.  Curious, I began Googling Anne and her book.  I discovered the name of the booklet was Quilting with Anne Orr.  The 1944 version has long been out of print, but it was reprinted in 1990.  After clicking around a bit more, I found a copy at Thrift Books and ordered it. It was a whopping $3.95. 

About five days later it arrived in my mailbox.  That evening I sat down with a cup of tea and Anne’s book.  It was then I nearly blew my own quilting gasket.  The book had eight quilt patterns in it.  The entire book was 32 pages and six of those pages were applique templates.  That meant 26 pages were devoted to quilt patterns.  After I divided the 26 pages by 8 (the number of patterns), I discovered 6.5 pages could be devoted to a pattern.  Considering two pages were completely filled with pictures, and more pictures took up additional space on the remaining pages, even less space was given to quilt instruction…

Which led me to question:  Were quilters years ago smarter than today’s quilters?  I mean, I have purchased patterns where it took an entire book to explain the directions for just one pattern.  I have patterns where the pages devoted to instruction easily doubled the 6.5 pages per instruction in Anne’s book.  Heck, with some of her quilts, the directions were a whopping half a page.  Did the quilters back in the 1940’s not need as many directions as we do?   Were they smarter than we are? 

That’s when I clawed my way out of the Anne Orr rabbit hole.  There had to be a reason her directions were so sparse (and left so much to chance) and our directions are, well…more complex and leave little to nothing to chance.  After reading the directions to some quilt patterns I purchased in the last two years, and then comparing them not only to Anne’s book, but to additional quilt patterns on the internet which date back to the 1940’s, I’ve come up with a theory:

It’s not that our quilting foremothers were smarter than we are (nor are we necessarily smarter than they were), it’s that the quilting landscape has changed.  Hear me out. 

Quilters (or any other type of sewists) typically had a sewing skill set from an earlier age that we do.  In the 1940’s most women had at least some kind of rudimentary knowledge of sewing.  Chances are their mothers or grandmothers made some of their clothes and other household goods (including quilts) and passed this information along to the next generation.  Some girls may not have liked to sew, but they at least knew the basics – how to mend, sew on a button, and sew a seam.  Chances are a good deal of them were familiar with a sewing machine of some type.  With this being the case, they probably did not need as many instructions as quilters do today.  Today, many quilters come to the art later in their life.  Their mothers may not have sewed, or they may not have been interested in sewing until now.  Sewing may not have been part of their consumer science class in school (the new name for home economics).  Hence they come into our quilting world needing a good grounding in the basics and plenty of clear, concise directions.

The need for quilts was often quite utilitarian, verses our quilts which aren’t necessarily utilitarian.  In the past, many quilts were made out of necessity – to keep people warm.  These quilts weren’t necessarily difficult.  They weren’t complicated,  they just needed to be pieced and quilted before winter set in to keep folks warm.  It’s not that these quilts were ugly and thrown together without thought.  Many of them were planned, but they were simple so the piecing could be done quickly and then just as quickly quilted.  While we make quilts which are destined to go on a bed, we don’t have a winter deadline.  We have blankets and bedspreads from Target, Belks, Walmart, or other places that can keep us warm.  We have more time to spend on a bed quilt and can use complex piecing techniques or applique (if desired) to make our quilts gorgeous.  More complex design elements mean more directions, and more directions mean longer patterns. 

Quilting was a part of many women’s social fabric.  Sure, we have quilt guilds, online quilt groups, and quilt clubs, but these cater to certain individuals who already have an interest in quilting.  Chances are, if you belong to a guild, your membership comes from all over your city.  However, in the 1940s and even farther back in the past, things were a bit different.  Many churches had quilting groups, as did neighborhoods.  My great-grandmother quilted.  She would piece quilts during the winter, but in the spring and summer, she would call in her sisters, daughters, and granddaughters to help her quilt her tops. It was a skill and craft celebrated in churches and in neighborhoods. Many times quilting was a social event – the women would quilt and then share a meal together.  And it was a great time for those established quilters to pass down tips and tricks to the younger quilters, both perpetuating the art and the skill.  Most of the time quilt designers didn’t need to give a lot of directions simply because they weren’t needed.  People already were acquainted with terms like width of grain, bias, etc.

We have so many more tools.  Have you ever been in an antique store and find an old sewing box?  When the hubs and I are out antiquing, searching for old sewing kits and machines is one of my favorite things to look for.  A quick glance into one of these sewing caddies (even those from the 1970’s), shows the basics – scissors, thread, thimble, seam ripper, needles, pins, measuring tape, and perhaps a needle threader and tailor’s chalk.  Our “basics” are more complicated – rulers, scissors, several types of marking pens, thimbles, maybe a couple of sizes of rotary cutters, extra blades, pins, needles, seam ripper, post-it notes, stilettos…and I probably could add a few more items I just can’t think of right now.  If I plan to attend a quilt retreat or a class, I need a list of my “basics” just to make sure I have them all packed!

On top of our complicated basics, quilters now have the option of a choice of machines (most quilters own more than one), cutters such as Accuquilt, regular irons (for regular pressing), small irons for applique or block units, pressing mats, and cutting mats.  Usually these additional “basics” also have to be included.

I will be one of the first quilters to admit, I like these gadgets.  They make my quilting life easier and in most cases, faster.  However, they all require their own set of directions and if they’re used in a quilt pattern, the pattern also must write in the directions for the gadget as well as the pattern.  So the pattern is longer and more complicated.*  The fewer the gadgets available, the fewer the directions, thus the shorter the length of the pattern.

Maybe earlier designers were more willing to let you figure stuff out on your own.  On page 5 of Anne Orr’s booklet, we find the directions for her Jonquil Quilt.  The first paragraph is standard – it simply tells you how large to cut the applique blocks, and scallop strips.  The second paragraph instructs on how to make the applique blocks:

Mark the lengthwise and crosswise center on 12 of the blocks.  Trace the placement guide to each of the blocks, matching the arrows to the folds.  Rotate the guide 180 degrees to trace the second half of the pattern.  Pin the applique pieces in place, alternating the colors of the flowers and using dark yellow petals and insides with the light-yellow cup and vice versa. Applique pieces in place.

That’s it.  That’s all.  No explanation about applique stitches, no suggestions about using glue instead of pins.   Her pattern contains a few individual applique pieces to trace.  The placement guide is a sketch of the block.    There are no suggestions on how to quilt it.  There is nothing written about binding.  Compare Anne’s pattern with one of our contemporary designers such as Ester Aliu – who for comparison’s sake, her pattern for Mia May, a 49 x 65-inch quilt, is 44 pages in length.  Ann’s Jonquil pattern is a half a page for an 80 x 104-inch quilt.

I think quilt pattern designers prior to the 1970’s quilt revival assumed a great deal (somewhat accurately).  First, they presumed most folks who quilted either knew how to sew, or had access to people who did know how to sew, if they needed any help.  And while yes, some of the patterns during that time period were “easier” than those of today, I also think the simplicity gave the quilter license to change things up in order to make their quilt truly theirs.  And I believe the designers presumed if the quilter wanted to change the looks of the pattern, they certainly had the skill set to do so.

However, to be fair to our contemporary designers, they have to write patterns with lots of skill levels in mind, because of where we are at as a sewing society.  The social fabric of our overall sewing knowledge is in tatters for several reasons.  First, while a version of home economics is still taught today in some schools, it is more like consumer science and generally doesn’t have a sewing or cooking module.  Second, we had the Great Decimation of Quilting Knowledge in the 1950’s and 1960’s.  Coming off World War II and into the Women’s Movement, women entered the workforce in great numbers.  Hobbies like sewing and quilting fell into decline as women struggled to find balance in work and home life (hey, we’re still struggling with that).  It wasn’t until the mid-seventies that quilting experienced a revival with the onset of the nation’s Bicentennial celebrations.  As the interest in quilting cranked up, we suddenly realized very few people actually knew how to do it well and accurately.  After relying on old publications and struggling through them – probably like Anne Orr’s book – the new designers decided the directions needed to be more thorough and complete.  And this type of direction has been maintained as the “norm.”

So do I think past quilters were smarter than we are today?  No.  However, I do think they were regularly exposed to the art of sewing and quilt making on a regular basis and became familiar with both to the point where complete directions were not required.  I do admire what they were able to produce without all the fancy notions and gadgets we have, but that doesn’t mean I want to trash my Electric Quilt software or go back to cutting out my patches with templates and scissors.  However, a large part of me wishes my quilting world were a bit simpler and didn’t require quite so much.

Until next week,

Love and Stitches,

Sherri and Felix

*File this under “It’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks.”  I came into quilting on the cusp of the introduction to the rotary cutter.  This was in the early eighties.  My first quilting classes taught the use of templates and scissors to cut out your patches.  And I was more than fine with that.  One day I went into Piece Goods to pick up a few things I needed and one of the sales folks handed me a rotary cutter to look at.  “This will revolutionize quilting!” she told me.

I thought it looked like a glorified pizza cutter.  I cautiously handed it back.  I was a young mother on a schoolteacher’s income and couldn’t afford it.

Gradually, however, quilting patterns changed.  At first you had directions for template cutting and rotary cutting.  And then finally templates pretty much disappeared altogether and all the directions were written for rotary cutters.  I read them with more than a bit of skepticism.  I made my square templates, traced around them on the fabric, and then re-measured with a rotary ruler before verifying they were the right size and proceeded to cut them out with a rotary cutter.  It took me three quilts to completely trust the rotary process.