Open Source Embroidery and the "gendered gift economy"

Whitney sez, "I recently interviewed Ele Carpenter, who runs the Open Source Embroidery Project, a "socially engaged art project" that "brings together programming for embroidery and computing." She has some interesting things to say about the gendered nature and gift economy of both coding and crafting. The project is currently on display at the HTTP Gallery in London."

Embroidery is constructed (mostly by women) in hundreds of tiny stitches which are visible on the front of the fabric. The system of the stitches is revealed on the back of the material. Some embrioderers seal the back of the fabric, preventing others from seeing the underlying structure of the pattern. Others leave the back open for those who want to take a peek. A few integrate the backend process into the front of the fabric. The patterns are shared amongst friends in knitting and embroidery 'ciricles'.

Software is constructed (mostly by men) in hundreds of tiny pieces of code, which form the hidden structure of the programme or interface. Open Source software allows you to look at the back of the fabric, and understand the structure of your software, modify it and distribute it. The code is shared amongst friends through online networks. However the stitches or code only make sense to those who are familiar with the language or patterns.

Link (Thanks, Whitney!)

• [James David]

  While other readers are fascinated by the intricacies of code & embroidery, I love this story for the political aspect.

  Subversive stitching is a newfound favorite thing of mine, and I’m glad to have caught wind of the HTTP Gallery exhibit here.

• [trueblue2]

  1: Maybe that’s the case for you, but I don’t know anything about embroidery or computer codes and would not know the difference between good and bad work. However, as my partner can attest, object structure is far from my strong suit. It is cool that you have the skills to analyze design easily, but don’t assume that everyone is that way.

• [help i cant comfirm my username themelonbread]

  that’s a cool idea, but really… a project that encourages only women to embroider and men to program?

• [Gilbert Wham]

  Ele made BoingBoing! Yay!

• [Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator]

  T3knomanser, not all embroidery is surface-readable, especially the more dimensional sorts like stumpwork and Brazilian embroidery, or forms like shisa-work where the later stitches entirely obscure the initial working stitches. If you’re willing to allow needle lace as a variety of embroidery — and I think there’s a good argument to be made for that — then the potential inscrutability is considerably increased.

  Your point nevertheless stands for most varieties of embroidery: they tell their own tale.

  I’m fascinated by your story about non-coders being able to distinguish good from clumsy code. What class were you teaching at the time?

• [philentropist]

  This reminds me of a discussion I had with my grandmother. She had twelve children, and told me the only way she could afford to clothe them all was by making the clothes herself. She would buy one pattern, and modify it accordingly for each child. Current trends in intellectual property would probably cast her as a criminal, but I think it goes to show that the open-source mentality is a core American value that predates software.

• [t3knomanser]

  “However the stitches or code only make sense to those who are familiar with the language or patterns.”

  That’s just not true. My wife does embroidery, and I know nothing about it. But, I can look at the back side and see the stitches and I can make intuitive judgments about the structure, design and reasoning of those stitches. I can’t evaluate the details, but I can tell a good pattern from a bad one.

  On the same token, I’ve recontextualized computer code as poetry. Even people who don’t understand the logic and the syntax of a program can recognize good, clean code from clumsy, confusing code.