In the last few days, I've been experimenting with stitch on another small series of abstract photograph croppings which were just over 5 cm (2.5 ") square and set on a paper ground. The effects are shown most clearly in these two detail photos.
I stapled with a tiny stapler (metal stitches), punched small holes with a thick darning needle or a screw punch (shown here) and left both sets of holes empty (blind stitches), and then stitched small running stitches conventionally with fine black crochet thread to echo the shapes in the photographs.
Then, there's a catch. Most of those tiny dots you can see aren't actually stitches at all but small specks of black ink applied with a Pitt pen (would-be stitches?).
And last, here's a question. Although it's a possible method of attaching something to a ground or to another element in a piece of work, since it isn't delivered with a needle, is a staple truly a stitch after all? Views are most welcome!
Then, there's a catch. Most of those tiny dots you can see aren't actually stitches at all but small specks of black ink applied with a Pitt pen (would-be stitches?).
And last, here's a question. Although it's a possible method of attaching something to a ground or to another element in a piece of work, since it isn't delivered with a needle, is a staple truly a stitch after all? Views are most welcome!
Well, it depends how you define stitch, such as in
ReplyDeleteStitch: a method of piercing two or more flat materials in order to pass through a fine means of holding them together - or somesuch.
Nowadays even being stitched after a surgical operation is done with staples. Does it matter if staples are conventional stitches or not? You are using paper, which is not after all conventional fabric. It all looks a rather exciting exercise to me.
I like you definition of stitch. It is splendidly open ended and I agree, it matters not a jot whether staples are conventional stitches or not. I think in a rather bumbling way, I was trying to provoke thought about what stitch is and to suggest unusual solutions were possible.
DeleteThese experiments are most interesting to work through and I'm finding it all very exciting. In fact, I think I'm more excited by this than by anything stitch-related that I've done so far. I should thank you by the way for your staple suggestion a while back.
My initial inclination would be to call the staple an embellishment rather than a stitch. In the same category as a bead or a French knot when used to attach something to the background. On the other hand, staples have replaced traditional surgical stitches in many cases, accomplishing the same task & looking much the same. How's that for not taking a side? ;-)
ReplyDeleteSounds good to me. An embellishment it is, I think, whether it's a stitch or not. Perhaps I'm sitting on the fence too!
DeleteMaybe it's as much about thinking in terms of "connection" (connector?) as "stitch" - ? Threads, staples - and even marks - are all connecting materials (and ideas) with the paper... It is interesting to try and figure out where things fall when it comes to definitions, and to see the overlapping & the ambiguities/questions that arise.
ReplyDeleteIn any case - wonderful results...I love the dynamic geometry and the intricacy of the many elements! Enjoy this traccia!
Your "connector" perspective has really had me thinking as it wasn't what I had been considering consciously, though it now you point it out it seems so right. My conscious thoughts had been more about "attaching" in ways that added texture and visual interest and which reflected the man made structures in the photos - much less interesting thoughts! As you suggest, these ambiguities are great fun.
DeleteI'm playing again today with what you describe as "dynamic geometry" - another great description - and will probably post after the weekend if it seems to work well enough.