The structure of loom-weaving is simple; the warp is either up or down, which causes the weft to be either below or above. So cloth can be expressed in binary, though we would probably prefer it in color.

In weaving, the weavers must follow sequential steps; in this respect it is similar to, as far as I understand, ceramics or bronze casting. But any given step is not complex, far less so than cooking or driving.

Weaving can be time-consuming in as much as the preparations/steps prior to the actually weaving can be perceived as, well, long.

There are two characteristics of weaving that make it, to me, stand out from other art/craft techniques I've observed:

1) The basic premise/unit of weaving is grids. Whilst it is possible to make pictures in weaving, these pictures are made up of squares, or pixels if you like, and not "freehand".

2) The main part of loom-weaving, the weaving, is mechanical and repetitive. This may contradict perceptions/definitions of "making art" in that it is not, again for want of a better term, "freehand".

Which make weaving all the more attractive to this inside-the-box/happy-within-the-boundary maker.

After speaking to Cally last night, and reflecting on the Group R exhibition (working?) title of "Beginnings", I felt like going back to the start.


margery meyers haber said...

Although, within those parameters, it is possible to do some surprising things that bend the rules. That, in fact, is my favorite part of the process.

Meg said...

Yes, and that's where individual weaver's "colors" come in. But I do feel like these points are my "first page of the notebook" in weaving, Margery.