Week 5 - Back to Reading
Madeleine Vionnet - a pioneer and a Marian inspiration
No scanning this week, a flurry of other commitments outside the PhD space kept me run ragged and away from home (and the scanner). I was up and back to London three days this week (instead of a usual one, maximum) and while that kept me away from the computer and scanner, it did give me some good time to do some reading. A weekend trapped on British trains delayed by a whopping 7.5 hours also did wonders for getting some things done.
The major accomplishment this past weekend was the delightful Disentangling textiles: techniques for the study of designed objects edited by none other than Mary Schoeser! (and Christine Boydell). It’s a collection of essays that dissect the different approaches to studying textiles but also the issues that arise when doing it. Some of them, including Mary’s own article on printed handkerchiefs, were not terrible useful for my research (sorry Mary). Others with citations and quotes on symbols or knitted garments came in far more handy but the real stand out winners were three articles on the hierarchy of fashion textiles, orientalism, and oral history.
The piece on the hierarchy of fashion textiles was a very useful guide to categorising the relative status of the fabrics that go into the garments made, from ordinary/common to extraordinary/elite. Marian’s sumptuous and elegant silk velvets seem undisputably elite, but it is very useful to have a methodological approach by which to quantify precisely what makes them so refined and rich beyond their physical properties.
Compare her velvets to any other silk, or indeed to denim or polyester and you can see the differences in use and marketing beyond the touch of the cloth and the price point.
The chapter on orientalism was a fascinating and very apt cut to the quick of cultural appropriation in the colonial period. The chapter itself spoke of the “paisley” pattern and how Victorians whitewashed the Kashmiri boteh pattern in a direct expression of Imperial power and colonial fascination with the exotic and the owned. It highlights how trend can highlight power dynamics and the fashionable garment or item of the moment is often exploiting the exotic because there is an inherent connection between exoticism and novelty—one cannot exist without the other.
Marian travelled extensively and learned dyeing techniques and was heavily inspired in her art by a wealth of cultures from the Middle East and South and East Asia (among others). However, her introduction to dyecraft came on the back of a British book written by a white woman: Anne Maile. Tie and Dye as Present Day Craft is arguably responsible for launching Marian’s career to the heights it eventually reached as it helped her realise her artistic potential in cloth, but the vast majority of the language that would come to surround the concept of “tie-dye” came to use indigenous terms like plangi. Jack Lenor Larsen, the famous textile designer, said that Marian created “what may well be the most beautiful plangi silks in this century” rather than the most beautiful tie-dye.
I am intensely aware of the racial dynamics at play within this project and so having an article to draw appropriate attention to these issues of appropriation vs assimilation of technique has been a very useful and worthwhile piece of learning, in addition to plenty of other areas to avoid around deifying Marian’s genius as singular rather than a collaborative and social success that her artistic vision contributed to.
I also read an excellent article on Japanese craft in comparison to Anglo-American craft and how we treat each very differently in their respective cultures. I came away with the impression that craft is only perceived as such in the West when it is not representational, and can be marketed. Art being bound within the concept of our economic system is not surprising but way Marian effortlessly flitted between both, not caring about the difference is most starkly seen in her self-image. She styled herself an “artist-craftsman”, not as one or the other.
The photo left from the Tate Moden shows a small pot in a Japanese style by an English maker. It is curious to find it in a modern art museum but the descriptions call out the design of it and the art upon it. I suspect if it was only a pot, no matter how skilfully made, it would not be included within the museum.
Finally, I read a very interesting article about Madeleine Vionnet. Marian drew great inspiration from Vionnet in how her dresses flowed over the body, and would in her art-to-wear phase create a one off dress called Acid Vionnet (below left) in conjunction with Ben Compton. They would both create two twin pieces, Acid Vionnet and Nocturnal Moth (below right) using Marian’s prowess for dyeing and transforming fabric and Compton’s dressmaking skills. The article however was more about Vionnet’s business sense.
Vionnet was a savvy business woman, and viciously protected her vision and interests from commercial exploitation. The article highlighted the criticality of Vionnet’s relationship with the Galeries Lafayette and how the symbiotic relationship between design house and department store kept Vionnet’s fashion marketed and her work viable. Marian parterned with the Neiman Marcus group to offer her fashion through Bergdorf Goodman’s and Saks Fifth Avenue, as well as Neiman Marcus and Bonwit Teller. These weren’t her only retailers, but her presence in New York’s elite department stores was a reputation builder and firm evidence of her ability to hold her own against other major design houses like de la Renta and Dior. I’m glad to have found a helpful article to frame this thinking.