|
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw) Treadle with Joy Kati Reeder Meek Creek-Side Studio Marshall, MI USA greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
I remember that in his key note address Peter Collingwood referred to us as “Complicated Weavers”
On Feb 25, 2023, at 10:13 AM, Kati Meek <greyfur.kt@...> wrote:
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw) Treadle with Joy Kati Reeder Meek Creek-Side Studio Marshall, MI USA greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: weavetech@groups.io <weavetech@groups.io> On Behalf Of Melodie Usher Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 2:26 PM To: weavetech@groups.io Subject: Re: [weavetech] Complex Weavers name expansion I remember that in his key note address Peter Collingwood referred to us as “Complicated Weavers” Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
There's "Cutting-edge" weavers, though that has some unfortunate side associations. XD
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
Curious Weavers, perhaps.
There's "Cutting-edge" weavers, though that has some unfortunate side associations. XD
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
Ooooh. I like ‘curious’
Sent from liz's iPhone Www.aweaversway.com Instagram: Moncriefliz
On Feb 25, 2023, at 2:23 PM, lnweaves <laurie.nevin@...> wrote:
Curious Weavers, perhaps.
There's "Cutting-edge" weavers, though that has some unfortunate side associations. XD
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
Elaine Plaisance
I like that also. Then it will probably turned into just CW as the YMCA is now just the Y. Elaine Plaisance
From: weavetech@groups.io <weavetech@groups.io> On Behalf Of lnweaves
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 2:23 PM
To: weavetech@groups.io
Subject: Re: [weavetech] Complex Weavers name expansion Curious Weavers, perhaps. There's "Cutting-edge" weavers, though that has some unfortunate side associations. XD Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
Carly Jayne
According to Merriam-Webster, the oldest use of Complex meant to join or unite.
"Complex comes from the Latin complecti, which means “to entwine around, to embrace,” a word that is based in part on plectere (“to braid”).
Isn't that lovely? It's so poetic.
I looked into joining a few years ago I remember there being verbiage on the site stating CW was primarily meant for weavers working with 8-shaft looms or higher, though some 4-shaft weavers would be welcomed. Maybe I read that wrong? Did this change recently? I see more about the inclusion more loom types, even 2 shaft and backstrap looms- which is very exciting because now I can join and not feel like I am "sneaking in" :)
Ooooh. I like ‘curious’
Sent from liz's iPhone Instagram: Moncriefliz
Curious Weavers, perhaps.
There's "Cutting-edge" weavers, though that has some unfortunate side associations. XD
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
-- Carly JayneFood Obsessed Photography and Design
|
|
|
Inga Marie Carmel
When I joined it seemed that 4 shaft looms weren’t considered ‘complex’ enough. They weren’t listed in the directory, like they aren’t legit equipment.
My sig file was inspired by my reaction to that.
marie
Inga Marie Carmel Instagram @ingamarie ingamariecarmel@... An interesting plainness is the most difficult and precious thing to achieve - Mies van der Rohe
On Feb 25, 2023, at 7:44 PM, Carly Jayne <Cjayne@...> wrote:
According to Merriam-Webster, the oldest use of Complex meant to join or unite.
"Complex comes from the Latin complecti, which means “to entwine around, to embrace,” a word that is based in part on plectere (“to braid”).
Isn't that lovely? It's so poetic.
I looked into joining a few years ago I remember there being verbiage on the site stating CW was primarily meant for weavers working with 8-shaft looms or higher, though some 4-shaft weavers would be welcomed. Maybe I read that wrong? Did this change recently? I see more about the inclusion more loom types, even 2 shaft and backstrap looms- which is very exciting because now I can join and not feel like I am "sneaking in" :)
Ooooh. I like ‘curious’
Sent from liz's iPhone Instagram: Moncriefliz
Curious Weavers, perhaps.
There's "Cutting-edge" weavers, though that has some unfortunate side associations. XD
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw)
Treadle with Joy
Kati Reeder Meek
Creek-Side Studio
Marshall, MI USA
greyfur.kt@gmail.com
-- Carly JayneFood Obsessed Photography and Design
|
|
|
Nicely said. I have a "freelancer's" copy of Pointcarre weaving software that is quite expensive and in the early days when I went out to NYC for training and the years after, they said they looked at my web site occasionally to see what I was up to. A little embarrassed, I said, but most things are relative simple in their basic construction. Their response was something like "simple, yes, but always with a little interesting complexity". While there may be interest in a more inviting naming convention, there is a lot to say for keeping a name that has existed for a while so folks don't lose track of it. Perhaps a "subname" to go with it, or a slogan that is usually paired with the name would be a good idea. Sara von Tresckow, Fond du Lac, WI sarav@... Author of “When a Single Harness Simply Isn’t Enough” http://www.woolgatherers.com Öxabäck Looms, Ashford products, yarns, books and more - visit us in Fond du Lac or contact us about your weaving/spinning needs
|
|
|
I like the idea with the subname or a slogan.
Regina
Am 26.02.2023 um 03:51 schrieb Sara von Tresckow:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Nicely said.
I have a "freelancer's" copy of Pointcarre weaving software that is quite
expensive and in the early days when I went out to NYC for training and the
years after, they said they looked at my web site occasionally to see what I
was up to. A little embarrassed, I said, but most things are relative simple
in their basic construction. Their response was something like "simple, yes,
but always with a little interesting complexity".
While there may be interest in a more inviting naming convention, there is a
lot to say for keeping a name that has existed for a while so folks don't
lose track of it. Perhaps a "subname" to go with it, or a slogan that is
usually paired with the name would be a good idea.
Sara von Tresckow, Fond du Lac, WI
sarav@...
Author of "When a Single Harness Simply Isn't Enough"
https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.woolgatherers.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C89197542b9544521d50e08db17a45460%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638129766771135094%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=iKcnYHerf1xD4b3Z4cHoowtxZT8Vb8YLsakA7yMazGE%3D&reserved=0 Öxabäck Looms, Ashford products, yarns, books
and more - visit us in Fond du Lac or contact us about your weaving/spinning
needs
|
|
|
‘Creative Weavers’ seems to fit!! Denice
On Feb 25, 2023, at 9:13 AM, Kati Meek <greyfur.kt@...> wrote:
Someone asked some weeks ago about how to make "Complex Weavers" organization sound less intimidating. Some possibilities for a name expansion, while keeping "CW" intact, might be: Courageous Weavers, Committed Weavers, Creative Weavers... Challenged.. Crazy... Confused... some or all of these? Kati, (who's old eyes wish there were instructions on weaving some of the complexly threaded structures on, say, a 24-shaft straight draw) Treadle with Joy Kati Reeder Meek Creek-Side Studio Marshall, MI USA greyfur.kt@gmail.com
|
|
|
‘Curious Weavers’ is also full of meaning and accurate.
Denice
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Feb 25, 2023, at 10:26 PM, Regina Wegemund <Regina.Wegemund@...> wrote:
I like the idea with the subname or a slogan.
Regina
Am 26.02.2023 um 03:51 schrieb Sara von Tresckow:
Nicely said.
I have a "freelancer's" copy of Pointcarre weaving software that is quite
expensive and in the early days when I went out to NYC for training and the
years after, they said they looked at my web site occasionally to see what I
was up to. A little embarrassed, I said, but most things are relative simple
in their basic construction. Their response was something like "simple, yes,
but always with a little interesting complexity".
While there may be interest in a more inviting naming convention, there is a
lot to say for keeping a name that has existed for a while so folks don't
lose track of it. Perhaps a "subname" to go with it, or a slogan that is
usually paired with the name would be a good idea.
Sara von Tresckow, Fond du Lac, WI
sarav@...
Author of "When a Single Harness Simply Isn't Enough"
https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.woolgatherers.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C89197542b9544521d50e08db17a45460%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638129766771135094%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=iKcnYHerf1xD4b3Z4cHoowtxZT8Vb8YLsakA7yMazGE%3D&reserved=0 Öxabäck Looms, Ashford products, yarns, books
and more - visit us in Fond du Lac or contact us about your weaving/spinning
needs
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
‘Curious Weavers’ is also full of meaning and accurate.
Denice
> On Feb 25, 2023, at 10:26 PM, Regina Wegemund <Regina.Wegemund@...> wrote:
>
> I like the idea with the subname or a slogan.
>
> Regina
>
>> Am 26.02.2023 um 03:51 schrieb Sara von Tresckow:
>> Nicely said.
>> I have a "freelancer's" copy of Pointcarre weaving software that is quite
>> expensive and in the early days when I went out to NYC for training and the
>> years after, they said they looked at my web site occasionally to see what I
>> was up to. A little embarrassed, I said, but most things are relative simple
>> in their basic construction. Their response was something like "simple, yes,
>> but always with a little interesting complexity".
>> While there may be interest in a more inviting naming convention, there is a
>> lot to say for keeping a name that has existed for a while so folks don't
>> lose track of it. Perhaps a "subname" to go with it, or a slogan that is
>> usually paired with the name would be a good idea.
>>
>> Sara von Tresckow, Fond du Lac, WI
>> sarav@...
>> Author of "When a Single Harness Simply Isn't Enough"
>> https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.woolgatherers.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C89197542b9544521d50e08db17a45460%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638129766771135094%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=iKcnYHerf1xD4b3Z4cHoowtxZT8Vb8YLsakA7yMazGE%3D&reserved=0 Öxabäck Looms, Ashford products, yarns, books
>> and more - visit us in Fond du Lac or contact us about your weaving/spinning
>> needs
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
 Teresa Edmisten
I support Museum of Design Atlanta. Http://museumofdesign.org
On Feb 26, 2023, at 6:38 AM, Syne Mitchell <synemitchell@...> wrote:
I like "curious". :D ‘Curious Weavers’ is also full of meaning and accurate.
Denice
> On Feb 25, 2023, at 10:26 PM, Regina Wegemund <Regina.Wegemund@...> wrote:
>
> I like the idea with the subname or a slogan.
>
> Regina
>
>> Am 26.02.2023 um 03:51 schrieb Sara von Tresckow:
>> Nicely said.
>> I have a "freelancer's" copy of Pointcarre weaving software that is quite
>> expensive and in the early days when I went out to NYC for training and the
>> years after, they said they looked at my web site occasionally to see what I
>> was up to. A little embarrassed, I said, but most things are relative simple
>> in their basic construction. Their response was something like "simple, yes,
>> but always with a little interesting complexity".
>> While there may be interest in a more inviting naming convention, there is a
>> lot to say for keeping a name that has existed for a while so folks don't
>> lose track of it. Perhaps a "subname" to go with it, or a slogan that is
>> usually paired with the name would be a good idea.
>>
>> Sara von Tresckow, Fond du Lac, WI
>> sarav@...
>> Author of "When a Single Harness Simply Isn't Enough"
>> https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.woolgatherers.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C89197542b9544521d50e08db17a45460%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638129766771135094%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=iKcnYHerf1xD4b3Z4cHoowtxZT8Vb8YLsakA7yMazGE%3D&reserved=0 Öxabäck Looms, Ashford products, yarns, books
>> and more - visit us in Fond du Lac or contact us about your weaving/spinning
>> needs
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
Melissa Weaver Dunning
I joined Complex Weavers many years ago, in order to become part of the Acadian Weavers study group, which was focused on 2 shaft textiles. I have also been part of the Early Weaving Nooks and Manuscripts group and currently, the Oscar Beriau group. None of these groups require more than a 4 shaft loom.
there is a lot of room for variety in CW!
|
|
|
Amy N
Replying to this whole thread…
I encourage anyone who is interested in this conversation to take a look at the website. The Complex Weavers logo at the top of the page is followed by our carefully crafted tagline:
Encouraging curiosity, exploration, innovation in weaving
And then this description:
Complex Weavers is dedicated to expanding the boundaries of handweaving, to encourage weavers to develop their own creative styles, to inspire through research, documentation, and the sharing of innovative ideas. We challenge our skills and imagination by sharing information and innovations with our fellow weavers – both directly and through our study groups, Seminars, Journal and biennial exhibition, Complexity.
Nowhere in any of our materials does it mention number of shafts, type of loom, weave structure, etc. Nor are there any limitations on membership.
Honestly, anyone can join - whether or not they are even a weaver!
These changes to the logo, tagline and description were made when Wendy Morris was President many years ago. And since then, we have been careful to be as inclusive as possible.
We have a Kumihimo study group — no loom needed! We have a number of study groups that could be perfect for 4-shaft weavers. For example, Ondule Textiles - Weaving with a Fan Reed. The Double Weave study group description specifically calls out 4-shaft weavers: “Double Weave” is a study group with approximately 30 weavers. Most of the group describe themselves as intermediate level double weavers, the rest divide between beginners and advanced. Members of the group have looms from 4 – 16 to more shafts, although if 4 shafts are your maximum the options for double weave are limited. We are open and welcoming to weavers of all experience levels. All that’s required is enthusiasm!”
I could to on and on, and I won’t.
I’m just encouraging anyone who thinks they aren’t a good fit for Complex Weavers to reconsider.
Feel free to ask here, or me privately, or come to a public gathering at a regional weaving conference.
We’d love to have you!
Amy Norris Past President, Complex Weavers Current Membership and Merchandise* Person
|
|
|
Inga Marie Carmel
Thank you. Exactly. I was just going to check the website, I had a feeling that the language had changed and was more inclusive. That works for me.
Maybe an issue dedicated to simplicity or even a regular feature would help. It could be design simplicity or little looms, rigid heddle looms, as well as 2 and 4 shaft. Even ( gasp) things that are easy to do but somehow complex. Or how about calling the exhibit “Simplicity” some time, focused on “an interesting plainness”, or complex projects on simple looms. Actions speak louder than words. Whatever it is has to be big, bold and obvious, or it’s not going to be noticed by anyone that hasn’t already.
marie
Inga Marie Carmel An interesting plainness is the most difficult and precious thing to achieve - Mies van der Rohe
On Feb 26, 2023, at 09:15, Amy N <amyfibre@...> wrote:
Replying to this whole thread…
I encourage anyone who is interested in this conversation to take a look at the website. The Complex Weavers logo at the top of the page is followed by our carefully crafted tagline:
Encouraging curiosity, exploration, innovation in weaving
And then this description:
Complex Weavers is dedicated to expanding the boundaries of handweaving, to encourage weavers to develop their own creative styles, to inspire through research, documentation, and the sharing of innovative ideas. We challenge our skills and imagination by sharing information and innovations with our fellow weavers – both directly and through our study groups, Seminars, Journal and biennial exhibition, Complexity.
Nowhere in any of our materials does it mention number of shafts, type of loom, weave structure, etc. Nor are there any limitations on membership.
Honestly, anyone can join - whether or not they are even a weaver!
These changes to the logo, tagline and description were made when Wendy Morris was President many years ago. And since then, we have been careful to be as inclusive as possible.
We have a Kumihimo study group — no loom needed! We have a number of study groups that could be perfect for 4-shaft weavers. For example, Ondule Textiles - Weaving with a Fan Reed. The Double Weave study group description specifically calls out 4-shaft weavers: “Double Weave” is a study group with approximately 30 weavers. Most of the group describe themselves as intermediate level double weavers, the rest divide between beginners and advanced. Members of the group have looms from 4 – 16 to more shafts, although if 4 shafts are your maximum the options for double weave are limited. We are open and welcoming to weavers of all experience levels. All that’s required is enthusiasm!”
I could to on and on, and I won’t.
I’m just encouraging anyone who thinks they aren’t a good fit for Complex Weavers to reconsider.
Feel free to ask here, or me privately, or come to a public gathering at a regional weaving conference.
We’d love to have you!
Amy Norris Past President, Complex Weavers Current Membership and Merchandise* Person
|
|
|
My thoughts:
I have lost track of how many times over the years someone has said to me, "I don't belong in Complex Weavers because _____" where _____ is generally one of three things: "I don't have a lot of shafts," "I'm not an incredibly experienced weaver," or "my work isn't impressive/complicated/etc. enough". In fact, that seems to be the view that most weavers I encounter have of CW (except for CW members, of course).
In short, if CW really does want to welcome anyone who is curious about weaving, we have an image problem to fix.
I think this image problem arises from several directions (in no particular order) - The most visible work from Complex Weavers members (and many of the structural articles in the Journal) does tend to be work done using a lot of shafts. As a result, when people think of CW, they think "for people with a bazillion shafts". If you look at Complexity, the CW exhibit, much (not all) of the work is complex structures that are done in a lot of shafts.
- Easily misinterpreted or non-inclusive language: Efforts to include eight shaft weaves in the recent book issued by CW, etc. are helpful if you actually read the book, but if you just look at the title, "Eight Shafts: Beyond the Beginning", it's easy to misinterpret that as either implying an expected "growth" progression from an eight shaft to multishaft loom, or as being for "beyond the beginning" (i.e. more experienced) weavers on eight shafts or more. I've met people who have made both misinterpretations. Language like that give the impression that joining CW means that you have to have at least eight shafts and preferably more.
- I hate to say this, but I also feel that attitude (both in CW and the rest of the weaving community) plays a part. Weavers with more than eight shafts typically have those looms because they want to explore structures that can't be done on fewer shafts. There's nothing wrong with this, but it often results in the belief (explicit or unconscious) that weavers on four and eight shaft looms are limited in the complexity of what they produce, and if they wanted to create more complex/creative work they'd upgrade to more shafts. This attitude is not in any way limited to Complex Weavers members, but because a lot of CW members, especially the more well-known ones, have more than 8 shafts, I do think there is a thread of that running through the organization no matter how much we try to language otherwise.
- Sometimes this perspective is explicitly stated. For example, a friend of mine's guild representative for Complex Weavers put this note into the Guild newsletter:
"Have you ever considered joining Complex Weavers? Membership is open to those weavers who venture forth on 8 shaft looms, or more. However if you only have 4 shafts right now, we also would welcome you. Complex Weavers gives one the chance to meet like minded weavers, and to share and learn from each other."
There's no better way to explain to four-shaft weavers or rigid heddle weavers that they are not welcome and will be looked down on if they do join. - I do think the name is part of the problem, because "do I belong in Complex Weavers?" necessarily requires a self-assessment "Am I making complex work? Is my work complex enough for me to qualify?" One thing I've noticed is that weavers often under-assess their skills. When Janet and I were running our 5,000-person weave-alongs, we used to ask "Do you consider yourself a beginning, advanced beginner, experienced, or expert weaver?" We got many responses to the effect of "Well, I've been weaving for 20 years, but I'd still consider myself an advanced beginner because..." We eventually changed the language to cite more specific skills for each level and got much better results. The takeaway here is that if you expect weavers to self-qualify by evaluating whether their work is complex, a LOT of them are, out of lack of self-confidence, going to disqualify themselves immediately.
As the former chair of the Board at the San Jose Museum of Quilts and Textiles, and as someone who is trying to create a diverse community at the Handweaving Academy, I've done quite a bit of thinking about how to create a diverse and welcoming community. Here are some ideas for how CW might improve inclusivity, which I think was the central intent of evaluating a name change: - Don't just pay lip service, make a concerted effort. Currently CW says clearly on the website that fewer-than-eight-shaft, etc. weavers are welcome, but there's no specific attempt to welcome them or show them they're valued once they join. Valuing diversity means more than just saying "We welcome ALL weavers," it means putting effort into making sure they FEEL welcome. If you consider the attitude of many >8 shaft weavers towards four-shaft looms, rigid heddle looms, and the weavers that use them, that means that "welcoming all weavers" actually means "We'd love it if you would join but you'll encounter people who are snobbish towards you and we won't do anything to encourage you once you do join," that does not solve the problem no matter how much "diversity language" or lip service there is on your website.
So, consider DOING things to make sure that weavers with fewer shafts or less experience feel welcome. For example: in Complexity, reserve a category for "leaving less than five years," "4-8 shafts" or "best use of a rigid heddle loom". Showcase work by less experienced or fewer-shaft weavers in the quarterly Newsletter. Showcase it in the Journal. Representation matters, and seeing examples of whatever type of weaver you are showcased prominently will help increase the sense of inclusivity. A study group JUST for four-shaft weavers or for rigid heddle weavers might be an interesting idea if you can find someone to chair it. - Work on changing member attitudes towards weavers on fewer shafts. This is a hard "lift" because that attitude is so ingrained in weaving culture generally, but showcasing great work being done on four shafts is a way to start changing attitudes.
- Think carefully about what self-assessments you're asking weavers to make when evaluating whether they belong. I think the word "complex" is a real problem IF you want less experienced weavers and/or weavers on fewer shafts to self-assess that they belong. It's a vague term that is easily misinterpreted, a lot of weavers don't feel their work is "complex" enough to join. If you WANT only those weavers who are skilled and/or confident enough to consider their work "complex", though, it's a great term to use.
- Figure out who you DO want and language accordingly. It's OK for CW to be reserved for X type of weavers - some boundaries are useful and necessary to have - but what constitutes X? How would you describe your desired membership? What are their values? How much experience do they have? Who is underrepresented and how can you make it CLEAR (walking the walk) that they are welcome? Build some profiles of different types of weavers you want in CW and write your language/encourage people/do outreach to those people accordingly. (Creating "avatars" in a marketing sense will help here. We had four different profiles/avatars when we designed the Handweaving Academy.)
Bottom line: I do think the name "Complex Weavers" is a problem if you want to attract newer and 8-or-less shaft weavers, but before you change it, decide who you DO want, and then design your organization and messaging accordingly. (Deciding who really is welcome may involve some soul-searching, both in leadership and the organization. Does the membership REALLY want an influx of fewer-shaft and/or less experienced weavers, or do they just want to feel good about saying they're welcome?)
Tien
|
|
|
Elaine Plaisance
Tien, thank you for such in depth comments. There is much to think about. Elaine Plaisance
From: weavetech@groups.io <weavetech@groups.io> On Behalf Of Tien Chiu
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2023 8:48 AM
To: weavetech@groups.io
Subject: Re: [weavetech] Complex Weavers name expansion My thoughts: I have lost track of how many times over the years someone has said to me, "I don't belong in Complex Weavers because _____" where _____ is generally one of three things: "I don't have a lot of shafts," "I'm not an incredibly experienced weaver," or "my work isn't impressive/complicated/etc. enough". In fact, that seems to be the view that most weavers I encounter have of CW (except for CW members, of course). In short, if CW really does want to welcome anyone who is curious about weaving, we have an image problem to fix. I think this image problem arises from several directions (in no particular order) - The most visible work from Complex Weavers members (and many of the structural articles in the Journal) does tend to be work done using a lot of shafts. As a result, when people think of CW, they think "for people with a bazillion shafts". If you look at Complexity, the CW exhibit, much (not all) of the work is complex structures that are done in a lot of shafts.
- Easily misinterpreted or non-inclusive language: Efforts to include eight shaft weaves in the recent book issued by CW, etc. are helpful if you actually read the book, but if you just look at the title, "Eight Shafts: Beyond the Beginning", it's easy to misinterpret that as either implying an expected "growth" progression from an eight shaft to multishaft loom, or as being for "beyond the beginning" (i.e. more experienced) weavers on eight shafts or more. I've met people who have made both misinterpretations. Language like that give the impression that joining CW means that you have to have at least eight shafts and preferably more.
- I hate to say this, but I also feel that attitude (both in CW and the rest of the weaving community) plays a part. Weavers with more than eight shafts typically have those looms because they want to explore structures that can't be done on fewer shafts. There's nothing wrong with this, but it often results in the belief (explicit or unconscious) that weavers on four and eight shaft looms are limited in the complexity of what they produce, and if they wanted to create more complex/creative work they'd upgrade to more shafts. This attitude is not in any way limited to Complex Weavers members, but because a lot of CW members, especially the more well-known ones, have more than 8 shafts, I do think there is a thread of that running through the organization no matter how much we try to language otherwise.
- Sometimes this perspective is explicitly stated. For example, a friend of mine's guild representative for Complex Weavers put this note into the Guild newsletter:
"Have you ever considered joining Complex Weavers? Membership is open to those weavers who venture forth on 8 shaft looms, or more. However if you only have 4 shafts right now, we also would welcome you. Complex Weavers gives one the chance to meet like minded weavers, and to share and learn from each other."
There's no better way to explain to four-shaft weavers or rigid heddle weavers that they are not welcome and will be looked down on if they do join. - I do think the name is part of the problem, because "do I belong in Complex Weavers?" necessarily requires a self-assessment "Am I making complex work? Is my work complex enough for me to qualify?" One thing I've noticed is that weavers often under-assess their skills. When Janet and I were running our 5,000-person weave-alongs, we used to ask "Do you consider yourself a beginning, advanced beginner, experienced, or expert weaver?" We got many responses to the effect of "Well, I've been weaving for 20 years, but I'd still consider myself an advanced beginner because..." We eventually changed the language to cite more specific skills for each level and got much better results. The takeaway here is that if you expect weavers to self-qualify by evaluating whether their work is complex, a LOT of them are, out of lack of self-confidence, going to disqualify themselves immediately.
As the former chair of the Board at the San Jose Museum of Quilts and Textiles, and as someone who is trying to create a diverse community at the Handweaving Academy, I've done quite a bit of thinking about how to create a diverse and welcoming community. Here are some ideas for how CW might improve inclusivity, which I think was the central intent of evaluating a name change: - Don't just pay lip service, make a concerted effort. Currently CW says clearly on the website that fewer-than-eight-shaft, etc. weavers are welcome, but there's no specific attempt to welcome them or show them they're valued once they join. Valuing diversity means more than just saying "We welcome ALL weavers," it means putting effort into making sure they FEEL welcome. If you consider the attitude of many >8 shaft weavers towards four-shaft looms, rigid heddle looms, and the weavers that use them, that means that "welcoming all weavers" actually means "We'd love it if you would join but you'll encounter people who are snobbish towards you and we won't do anything to encourage you once you do join," that does not solve the problem no matter how much "diversity language" or lip service there is on your website.
So, consider DOING things to make sure that weavers with fewer shafts or less experience feel welcome. For example: in Complexity, reserve a category for "leaving less than five years," "4-8 shafts" or "best use of a rigid heddle loom". Showcase work by less experienced or fewer-shaft weavers in the quarterly Newsletter. Showcase it in the Journal. Representation matters, and seeing examples of whatever type of weaver you are showcased prominently will help increase the sense of inclusivity. A study group JUST for four-shaft weavers or for rigid heddle weavers might be an interesting idea if you can find someone to chair it. - Work on changing member attitudes towards weavers on fewer shafts. This is a hard "lift" because that attitude is so ingrained in weaving culture generally, but showcasing great work being done on four shafts is a way to start changing attitudes.
- Think carefully about what self-assessments you're asking weavers to make when evaluating whether they belong. I think the word "complex" is a real problem IF you want less experienced weavers and/or weavers on fewer shafts to self-assess that they belong. It's a vague term that is easily misinterpreted, a lot of weavers don't feel their work is "complex" enough to join. If you WANT only those weavers who are skilled and/or confident enough to consider their work "complex", though, it's a great term to use.
- Figure out who you DO want and language accordingly. It's OK for CW to be reserved for X type of weavers - some boundaries are useful and necessary to have - but what constitutes X? How would you describe your desired membership? What are their values? How much experience do they have? Who is underrepresented and how can you make it CLEAR (walking the walk) that they are welcome? Build some profiles of different types of weavers you want in CW and write your language/encourage people/do outreach to those people accordingly. (Creating "avatars" in a marketing sense will help here. We had four different profiles/avatars when we designed the Handweaving Academy.)
Bottom line: I do think the name "Complex Weavers" is a problem if you want to attract newer and 8-or-less shaft weavers, but before you change it, decide who you DO want, and then design your organization and messaging accordingly. (Deciding who really is welcome may involve some soul-searching, both in leadership and the organization. Does the membership REALLY want an influx of fewer-shaft and/or less experienced weavers, or do they just want to feel good about saying they're welcome?)
|
|
|
