Interview with Rebecca Burgess about her Vision for a Thriving Local Textile Economy

By Mae Colburn

Rebecca Burgess: What a Fibershed is, is taking responsibility for the biological context of your clothes. I’m interested in the revitalization of my community’s economy and green jobs, but I’m also interested in reconnecting to the plant and animal communities that are responsible for our clothes.  It’s quite a beautiful narrative, if we could support it.

It’s a beautiful narrative, and an imperative, according to Rebecca Burgess.  Burgess’ blog chronicles Fibershed-related events, projects, and the Fibershed Challenge: her quest to live for one year in clothes made from fibers sourced within a geographical region no larger than 150 miles from her front door. Her book, Harvesting Color, explains the dye potential of 36 plants, including pokeweed, elderberries, indigo, and coyote brush. Her restoration education curriculum gives children the opportunity to “investigate macro-environmental issues of our day” and “create solutions within their own landscape.”  Finally, the Fibershed Marketplace website, to be launched later this month, will provide resources for those interested in starting their own Fibershed Project.

Somehow, Burgess also finds time to work on her 45-acre organic farm in Northern California, where she grows and harvests over 4,500 natural dye plants.  She often does phone interviews from the farm: “I put my headset in, do my work, and answer calls.”  Burgess works hard, fueled both by sheer enthusiasm and by a distinct sense of urgency.  Her vision for a “thriving local textile economy” answers to a growing concern about the environmental, social, and economic impacts of the clothing industry.  Likewise, the Fibershed model serves as both a functional and symbolic antidote to the prevailing system.  Burgess’ commitment to local fiber reminds us of the physical labor involved in creating a garment from – as she puts it – “fiber to skin,” and forces us to reconsider the relationship between our bodies and our clothes.

RB: These little realities about living and working with plants and animals – it creates a difference in your body.  I know this because I observed the changes in myself.  You really learn how to work.  It’s like systems theory; you can get a system to start producing good results if you get the pendulum swinging in the right direction.  My body is different now; I’m sunburnt most of the time (even though I wear a lot of sunblock), but I’m strong, and I can endure long hours, and I have a much greater sense of confidence in what I can do physically because I see the product of my labor.

Tomorrow I’m driving up to the Capay Valley, where I have 2,000 indigo plants that I’m going to harvest.  I’m going to be harvesting from nine to nine at night, and I’ll have six or seven days like that in the summer.  Then once I harvest the indigo, I have to dry it all, stomp it, separate the stems, bag it, bring it back to the facility that I’m renting.  This summer has been a lot of maintenance; I have to do a lot of gopher trapping at the farm.  I’ve been dealing with irrigation problems, pressure valves, dripping stuff that’s not dripping the right way.  I’m getting tired, but I’m building capacity.

MC: Do you see this as a creative outlet as well as a manual, physical experience?

RB: Creativity is definitely expressed through the body, and I get to use my whole body while I’m farming.  I’m lifting.  I’m carrying.  I’m dragging.  I’m walking around.  I’m bending up and down.  All of that is a form of self-expression because you’re making all these small decisions for yourself.  You’re applying your own ideas and concepts second-to-second.  It sounds like mundane stuff, but oddly enough for the modern person, this is new terrain – at least for me – to have a total flow out on a land base, being out on 45 acres of organic farm, working.

MC: Do you see yourself as part of a movement of people interested in local textiles?

RB: I see myself as part of a continuum, a historical continuum, around textiles in this area.  In my region, a lot of retirees started raising sheep and alpaca, but not a lot of people were raising fiber for money.  When ‘fibershed’ became a useful word for people, and the community at large, some of those who’d been doing it a long time started to become recognized in a new way, and to feel the power behind what they were doing.

MC: On your website, you state that your mission is to “go beyond the one-year wardrobe and create a thriving local textile economy.”  What do you see this thriving local economy looking like?

RB: A thriving local textile economy would include current and existent land-owners working with young people, putting second housing on their land – for example, green modular trailers with solar panels.  If farmworker housing were a top priority, we could start training people who don’t yet have the skills, but have the energy [to begin farming].  The really important thing is continuity, and the only way to cultivate continuity is to put young people in proximity to people who have the skills.

But on a macro level, from a very specific supply chain perspective, we need to be able to take our wool, alpaca, mohair, then cotton, and eventually bast fibers (linen, hemp), and mill them at small-scale milling facilities that can be run off of solar technology.  There hasn’t been farm-based milling equipment designed for fibers except for wool, and there’s very little farm-based milling equipment for wool even, but for cotton it’s almost nonexistent, and for bast fibers – I have to put a call out there to anyone who understands how to engineer bast-fiber processing equipment and can scale it down to a farm size.

Pre-industrial revolution, we were relying on massive manpower, indentured servants, slaves.  Now we’re in a new era.  If we go back to a human-powered economy, this can’t be about indentured servants and slaves.  It has to be about cooperatively owned businesses, about people working for the common good – that’s how we’re going to inspire people to get involved in this.  We need equipment that honors our humanity; we’re not going to be slaves to technology, but we’re also not going to be slaves to each other.  We need this new human-scale technology combined with continuity of the generations.  We already have world-class fibers.  We have no lack of fiber, but there’s no processing equipment in my region, so all of those pieces – how to get the wool off the sheep, how to wash it, how to card it, how to blend it, spin it – all of this needs serious improvement.  To me, it’s about enhancing human infrastructure, technological infrastructure, and communication.  We’re talking about a revitalization of the whole economy when we talk about the revitalization of a Fibershed.

MC: Do you have any recommendations for people interested in learning more or starting a similar project?

RB: The website that we’re going to launch in the next week and a half will have a reading list and the protocol that we followed.  We started a one-year challenge, so we had a prototype wardrobe.  I started a Kickstarter campaign.  How did I organize farmers and artisans?  I used Google Docs.  I used Doodle Calendar.  I did community-building projects where instead of charging for workshops, I gave free classes for artisans and farmers, to bring them together.  You need to be able to build a network.  You also have to be in good health, because it takes a sound mind and body to create these networks and keep them alive.  It’s kind of like running a marathon in the beginning.

Mae Colburn is an independent textile researcher and writer and professional seamstress based in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Rebecca Burgess is an ecological restoration educator, curricula developer, author, and textile artist and a fifth-generation resident of the watershed where she works in Northern California.

Hussein Chalayan: Fashion Narratives

By Rio Jade Ali

"Before Minus Now," Spring/Summer 2000

Anyone lucky enough to have caught Savage Beauty at the Metropolitan Museum of Art this year will tell you that fashion exhibitions have reached a whole new level of communication. The sheer magnitude of Alexander McQueen’s work was on full display, every inch a tribute to the designer’s unmistakable showmanship and the breathtaking spectacles that he masqueraded as catwalk shows. Attracting unprecedented numbers for a show of this kind, it was clear that we had entered a new era for the humble fashion exhibition.

Enter Hussein Chalayan: Fashion Narratives: Launched at the Musee des Arts Decoratifs—while Savage Beauty was drawing to a record-breaking close— it is a representation of the entire Chalayan aesthetic and attitude towards fashion. It is clear from the outset that apart from wanting to transport the viewer to ‘Hussein Chalayan’s Universe’, the exhibition's principal desire is to communicate the stories that inspired the garments - hence the title of the exhibition. Often complex, constantly provocative and eternally intriguing, Chalayan’s technologically astounding body of work has examined and explored political, cultural, religious and geographical issues. Whether it’s his take on displaced peoples, as demonstrated so poignantly in AW2000’s ‘Afterwords’ where furniture literally transformed itself into garments, or his controversial assessments on religion (SS1998’s ‘Between’ and SS2005’s ‘Act of Institution’ spring to mind), Chalayan wants his audience to understand his complex messages. However with a lack of exhibition labels, one is forced to refer to the visitor’s catalogue in order to fully comprehend the significance of each garment, display and installation. This shouldn’t normally be a problem, except for the fact that being transported to said ‘Universe’ manifests itself in dim lighting and billowing reverberations - perfect in terms of atmospheric exploration, less so for the reality of reading in the dark.

"Afterwords," AW2000

This emphasis on the environmental facet of the exhibition sets it apart from many other fashion displays – particularly Chalayan’s previous retrospective at the Design Museum in 2009. In direct comparison to this highly lauded showcase, an evident amount of déjà vu is proffered. The eerily life-like mannequins fashioned to actively engage with the space (cleaning windows, painting walls etc.) remain, as does much of the actual visual content. Yet it is the way in which the curator, Pamela Golbin, presents the identical set of objects that offers a deeper experience, which in turn alters the exhibition intrinsically and entirely. The dummies and the garments they bear may appear to be exactly the same than the previous exhibition at the Design Museum, however housed in glass vitrines and cloaked in darkness They allow the exhibition to more fully communicate their socio-cultural messages.

Most significant in the exhibition is the digital innovation and Chalayan’s overwhelming application of video, never before utilized to such an extent in a fashion exhibition. A couple of hours isn’t enough if you want to take in the entire body of work on show. Video of unimaginable catwalk shows combine with largely abstract fashion film to create an innovative exhibition. The multimedia installation titled ‘I Am Sad Leyla’, featuring a life-size sculpture of the Turkish performer Sertab Erener with an image of her moving face projected onto the life-cast epitomises this sentiment. Add in a projection of a full orchestral performance and a musical score, and when asked about the defining moments of fashion curation in years to come, this haunting and arresting image is sure to be cited.

Rio Jade Ali is a London-based fashion writer and consultant, currently working on heritage projects with Burberry and Margaret Howell. She is undertaking her master’s at the RCA in Critical Writing in Art and Design.

YIELD: Making Fashion Without Making Waste

Quick Update: The dress in the poster is by the incredibly talented designer Caroline Priebe of Uluru

Here at Fashion Projects, we had been waiting for this exhibition for quite some time, or precisely since we met Timo Rissanen, the innovative professor of fashion and sustainability at Parsons the New School of Design, who pioneered the zero-waste fashion "movement." And the fact that the exhibition is opening at the Textiles Arts Center—one of our favourite new spaces in New York—could only add to our excitiment. More on the exhibition and Prof. Rissanen is forthcoming, but this is a sign-post to let you know of an upcoming related workshops, for which sign-up is needed!

For more information on the exhibition, which is opening to the public September 10, please visit the Textiles Arts Center, as well as the exhibition's website

On Kunsthåndverk: An Interview with Franz Schmidt and Charlotte Bik Bandlien

by Mae Colburn

Mae Colburn: How would you explain the word kunsthåndverk in English?

Franz Schmidt: It’s the Norwegian term for the crafts area.  Kunsthåndverk: arts and crafts.  ‘Articraft,’ directly translated.

Charlotte Bik Bandlien: It’s articraft versus artifact.

Schmidt and Bandlien presented an interesting play on words, especially in light of the fact that the Norwegian word artig – which to my American ears sounds exactly like ‘arti’ – translates to  ‘fun’ in Norwegian (a witty, though perhaps trivial connection).

I met artist Franz Schmidt and anthropologist Charlotte Bik Bandlien at a café on a busy street corner in Oslo several weeks back with the goal of formulating a loose English definition of the Norwegian term kunsthåndverk.  Schmidt, who describes himself as a kunsthåndverker, is perhaps best known throughout Norway for his work at Sjolingstad Woolen Mills, where he reproduced a series of archival textile samples.  His work is part of what appears to be a renewed interest in industrial textile production in Norway’s largely post-industrial landscape.  Bandlien is an anthropologist with a specialization in material culture.  Together, Schmidt, Bandlien, and I explored the contours of art, craft, and the textile industry within the context of Schmidt’s work.

MC: Could you provide a brief description of your background, Franz?

FS: I’m educated as a men’s tailor here in Oslo and I worked with costumes for two years before I applied to the Oslo National Academy of The Arts, where I studied one year at the fashion and costume department and then transferred to the textile department.  I started weaving quite late [in my studies] on a handloom, but I decided that I didn’t want to leave the school without knowing a craft, so I continued.

MC: How did you become involved with the mill?

FS: I was supposed to work with a small mill that was operating here in Oslo just after I finished my education and I went to Sjolingstad to get the basic information that I needed to run the mill here [in Oslo].  I fell in love with the place and ended up staying for two years.   The last project I did there was called Rekonstruksjoner in Norwegian – Reconstructions.  I reproduced material originally produced at Sjolingstad in the 1930s and, in collaboration with designer Siv So Hee Stenaa, made contemporary garments.  I found the original sample books in the archives at Sjolingstad and spent quite a long time studying the quality of the threads and the technical aspects to be able to produce them again.

MC: Could you describe the way the factory looks, feels, the colors, noises, smells.

FS: It’s situated in a valley just outside Mandal, as far down as you can go in Norway.  There were only two farms there before the man that started the business in 1894 decided that he wanted to build a mill.  It became a village with a shop and a post office and of course the electricity for the mill was possible because of the river that ran through the valley.  It’s quite a beautiful old brick building and you can find the original looms and technical equipment from as far back as 1910.   It’s now partly a museum and partly a small commercial business.  Because they are a museum, they have the responsibility to maintain the machines and the original atmosphere at the mill, but they also need to produce to generate some income.  Because they can’t replace old machinery, it’s a matter of finding the right balance between using and preserving the machinery [that is there].  That would destroy the museum.

MC: From what I understand you worked specifically with a mechanized Italian loom dating from the early 20th century.  What’s it like to work on a piece of machinery like that?

FS: You have to be very – tentative.  That’s perhaps not the right word, but it’s a personal relationship.  [The machine] has an individual voice.  It has a soul, so it’s a kind of friendship.  That’s the easiest way to describe it.

CBB: You could also describe how you feared it wouldn’t work out…

FS: That’s true.  I used that loom to make cloth for a suit, thinner than the regular quality they make at Sjolingstad, and that specific loom hadn’t been used to make [suiting] for a long time.  The yarn was quite thin and I was worried that the loom would be too tough, but when I started working on it, it was – and this is what Charlotte was talking about – it was like a homecoming for the machine because it is actually meant to handle that quality of yarn.  Every worry I had evaporated.

MC: This is a good segue into something that I’d like to ask both of you about.  Considering the largely deindustrialized nature of the Norwegian landscape, how does the industrial equipment at Sjolingstad fit into the context of contemporary textile production?

CBB: I think it’s interesting how the whole sphere of handicraft has been expanded to involve this sort of small-scale old-fashioned industry.  It’s all becoming part of [a set of] alternatives to industrial production.   What we’ve seen is a movement from a semiotic approach towards material culture to a reorientation towards materiality itself.   We currently relate to fabrics and clothing mainly as symbolic exchangeable fast fashion.  Now, due to "symbolic inflation," we need new strategies to uphold social distinction, to be exclusive, and that’s why we see this reorientation toward materiality.  It’s linked to an article by Alfred Gell called The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology, which is about this kind of dynamic: the thrill related to skill and knowledge of machinery adds value to objects. […] What’s interesting about Franz’ work is the notion of the archive; he has these small knowledge hubs, the type of knowledge that is currently being revalued.

MC: Because this is an oral interview, I’m curious whether you could provide verbal descriptions of the textile reconstructions you’ve produced.  As Charlotte mentioned, it’s a knowledge hub that you’ve worked quite hard to cultivate.

FS: The fabric that I reconstructed was quite a coarse fabric.  It’s hard, stiff; it’s not very soft.  It was meant to last for a lifetime.  I can easily visualize a young man buying a suit and thinking to himself ‘Now I have this suit for my entire life.’  I find it quite interesting to work with [historical] materials because it says something about the time and about how our perspective has changed.

CBB: Historically, Norwegian wool was considered too fine and now it’s considered too coarse because what we consider our ‘ideal’ material and tactile experience has changed.  A return to longer-lasting material is obviously a new tendency; durable, unique, environmentally sound materials are now really the only option in producing distinction and exclusiveness.

FS: […] I think it’s time for my area.  Everything we’ve been talking about now is part of the discussion.  You have a scale.  It’s like stages in a continuum.  You have brukskunst, which is the closest to industrial production, and that overlaps with areas of the kunsthåndverk field, which is more – as you say – small-scale unique one-off pieces.  And then that overlaps with design and fine art.  But we’re all using similar tools.

Mae Colburn is an independent textile researcher and writer and professional seamstress based in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Franz Schmidt is a textile artist and chair of the board of Oslo’s Format gallery, a space owned by the Norwegian Association of Arts and Crafts and devoted exclusively to developing the craft sector in Norway.  A recipient of the 2006 Kunsthåndverk prize, Franz begin the The Norwegian Artistic Research Fellowship Program this coming fall.

Charlotte Bik Bandlien is an Oslo-based anthropologist with a focus on material culture. Her thesis examined the notion of ‘retro’ and she has a background in both visual communication and trend analysis.  Bandlien is a contributing editor to Personae, a Norwegian fashion journal. She currently teaches design theory at Oslo National Academy of the Arts.

Alexander McQueen: Art, Beauty, and the Unique Body

Gallery View. Cabinet of Curiosities, Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Speaking Sunday June 19 at 3pm at the Metropolitan Museum of Art is model and athlete Aimee Mullins in conversation with Harold Koda, curator in charge at the Costume Institute. Mullins, who is a double-amputee, has collaborated with a range of artists and designers, including Alexander McQueen as well as Nick Knight and Matthew Barney—who cast her in Cremaster 3 wearing fantastical prosthesis perhaps most notably a pair of non-functional “glass” prosthesis. In 1998, she walked the runway for Givenchy (then designed by McQueen) wearing specially designed hand-carved boots/prosthesis, which are included in the Met exhibition “Savage Beauty.” Much has been written about her collaborations with McQueen, Knight and Barney—and while many, including Mullins herself, interpret as a mean towards greater visibility, others see it as spectacularizing "the disabled body." (These debates are evident in academic writings on the topic, which includes Vivian Sobchack’s and Marquard Smith’s articles in "TheProsthetic Impulse and Caroline Evans’s Fashion at the Edge.)

What has perhaps remained unaddressed and what I think is brought to the fore specifically by her collaboration with McQueen is the way it blurs the lines between medical prosthesis and fashion. This blurring is evident if we think of the history of Western undergarments, such as the corsets (some of which were orthopedic in kind), bustles, or cage crinolines, or more simply extreme high-heels or eyeglasses.

Francesca

Aimee Mullins, McQueen for Givenchy Show, AW 1998