 |
| Consider this for Slow Fashion: This coat (which I shared my sketch of in this post) is over 50 years old. . . . |
Ever since that conversation we had about Slow Fashion (or better perhaps, about Slowed-Down Consumerism) at the beginning of the year, I’ve wanted to find a way to think further — collectively and individually — about the complexities involved. A few bloggers of considerable privilege (counting myself in this number) track their retail fashion purchases for the year, assessing their effort to be more mindful of the environmental and ethical consequences of their wardrobes. . . A worthy enough endeavour, I think, this consciousness-raising, absolutely. But I hope Slow Fashion or Mindful Consumerism isn’t to become yet another trend, the adjectives tacked on simply to let us feel good about our continued interest in Fashion and Consumerism.
Already, for example, I’ve seen headlines applauding “Spikes in sales of sewing machines,” and I have to agree with this article titled “Buying new is not sustainable, no matter how you sew it,” which goes on to say that “regardless of how consumption is greenwashed, the ongoing promotion of wants over needs creates an aspirational culture, in which acquisition of the right products is the pinnacle of self-empowerment.”
How many of those sewing machines, I wonder, will still be in use five or ten years from now? And even if they’re still in use, making one’s own garments doesn’t automatically confer Good Environmentalist status nor ensure that one’s clothes are made ethically. As a few knitters commented on the last post (Eleonore and Kristin), as “slow” as knitting might be, yarn-consumption is still consumption. Sheep also impact the environment (in many positive ways, I believe, yes, but there’s an undeniable impact and it’s probably not always benign). Cotton production can divert and pollute water; it inevitably consumes it. Complexity of this sort can paralyze, although inspiring models are emerging. In a recent post, “I Want to Dress Like Rebecca Burgess,“Duchesse at Passage des Perles tells us about this eco-fashion activist, author of the book Fibreshed, who has been wearing clothing made from fibres, dyes, and labour within 150 miles of her home — for ten years now!
There are also inspiring models for mending and up-cycling what we already have — or rediscovering the joy of garments we already own, but have forgotten thanks to that “ongoing promotion of wants over needs” in our “aspirational culture.” Check out Katrina Rodabaugh’s Instagram feed for inspiration here. . . She makes mending visible, beautifully. . . and my friend Sue has posted recently on outfits she’s built from her own closet, styling garments from ten and more years ago so that they look current — and slow down her wanting. Instead of buying new, she’s been making the old look new.
And let’s not focus narrowly on Fashion, but broaden our thinking, as Dottoressa suggested in that earlier conversation, to other aspects of our lives. Where else could we mend or make do? We’ve repaired our dishwasher several times already in our condo, despite our having lived here only three years and the building (and dishwasher) being not yet a decade old. Each repair has required parts averaging over a hundred dollars. Were we not so stubborn, we could probably have bought a new machine. This is even more true of repairs to our bikes. . . And don’t get me started on our laundry machines. Neither of these is a model I would have chosen, and I miss features from my previous washer and dryer. But I’m trying my best to Want What I Have. . . increasingly conscious of what my privilege costs. . .
In case I’m sounding too self-righteous, however, let me switch perspective a bit (but not before confessing that I bought a new dress a few weeks ago, a well-considered purchase, but arguing that I “needed” to make it would be a much harder sell than the dress was). . .
In The Guardian’s fashion pages last week, designer and icon Vivienne Westwood expounds on her plan to save the planet. As her interviewer Jess Cartner-Morley says, it’s an easy plan to critique (its main component seems to be auctioning off a million packs of playing cards emblazoned with slogans). But her interviewer also points out an important truth Westwood has grasped, that “saving the planet is going to be about root-and-branch disruption, not making the odd tweak to schedules and shopping lists.”
This trenchant observation really resonated with me. On the one hand, it’s an overwhelming recognition for a consumer because I’m not sure how we’ll get to a systemic overhaul; on the other hand, though, it releases me from a sense of responsibility that can paralyse or depress or dangerously distress. So much of that sense occupies our lives right now in a variety of spheres. A tempting reaction is to ignore deliberately, assuming that nothing we can do will help at all. But such wilful ignorance exacts a cost, eventually, a cognitive dissonance that gets louder and louder, a denial often accompanied by defensiveness and guilt, a painful alienation from our human connection to Earth, our Home. . .
For me, seeing the imperative for “root-and-branch disruption” shifts my own responsibility, gives me room to do the best I can with my individual practices as a (Fashion) Consumer, while recognizing that we’re dealing globally with a massive system that’s intricately enmeshed with economies and politics and environmental eco-systems and cultures and social practices, all of which have evolved over centuries, albeit most problematically over the last seven decades.
I can acknowledge that my own small efforts are unlikely to effect “root-and-branch disruption,” but also know that making those efforts may nonetheless make an eventual difference as collective actions bring us to a “tipping point” for positive change. As I read on the door inside the washroom of a great little restaurant in Victoria yesterday (Part and Parcel, so good, in so many ways!) . . . .
The quotation from Mary Pipher echoes la philosophie du colibri which my friend Haude Bernaubé told me about as we sipped wine together on Rue Daguerre last December. The “philosophy of the hummingbird,” as explained by French writer, philosopher, farmer and environmentalist Pierre Rabhi, is built on a story/legend told by South American Indians. In response to a forest fire which had left all the other animals in despair and terror, the tiny hummingbird scoops up a few beads of water and drops them on the fire. Ridiculed and chastised by the others for the foolish scale of her actions, she responds that she understands, but that she must do what she can. You can read more about the story and about the movement founded on it here.
For now, this hummingbird must take a break to refuel, but over the next few weeks, I hope to return to the topic from different angles. And one of those complicating perspectives I’d like to think about is our need for beauty and self-expression . . . and how connected that can, or must, be to innovation. . . and how innovation might be achieved in ways that avoid the high costs we’ve seen to “Buying new.” (Short, quick answer — recombining, mending, upcycling — but a longer answer that acknowledges complexity might include development of skills, of new materials, sustainability of/for artisanship). . .
Introducing this perspective, the need for beauty and self-expression, finally brings me ’round to the promise of this post’s title, a promise I made a few weeks ago — and lets me explain the photos I’ve posted throughout. . . . There are more, still, of those to come in future posts, all from that All’Italiana exhibition of Italian Fashion as worn and/or made in Vancouver over the 20th century. These garments offer a way to think about Fashion as Art, and also about affordability — and thus class, the importance of quality — both as a social signifier and as an element in the sustainability of clothing. And more. . . . to be continued.
But before I go, one more sketch from my morning visiting that exhibition with my friend Alison. This sketch, you’ll be able to see immediately, is NOT mine, but hers. . . . I have a little video of her sketching, which includes the model, and I’ll post that later on Instagram. (Added June 19, 2021: here is the link to that video)
Isn’t it gorgeous? Art of the dress inspires art on the page. . . .
Okay, that’s it, for now. . . . Handing the mic over to you. . . There’s a whole lot of Random here, but I’m hoping that its Abundance will lead, eventually, to Coherence. . . (as Kim Stafford promises, in the quotation you’ll find top of the column on the right). . . .
This is an interesting topic. The issue, as I see it is often want vs need which in part is feed by governments all over the world building all plans on the expectation of continuous growth. We need different economic models that are not fed by unnecessary consumerism. The reality is that most of us have plenty of clothes. We need to stop worrying about wearing the same pieces again and again. So what if our friends have seen the dress before, if you feel good in it that is all that matters. The media also need to stop making it a headline every time a Royal or celebrity wear something again, it is silly and feeds the notion that we need something new for events. Maryann
Thanks for the mention, Frances. I find myself a bit overwhelmed every time I consider the idea of conscious consumerism. One article I read last year about ethical shopping said that we cannot "shop ourselves to a better world." Then went on to talk about the "root and branch disruption" you mention. But like that wonderful text on the bathroom wall (on a bathroom wall… love that!) I have to "act as if there is hope." As if there is something, however small, that I can do.
I like that the ideas of slow fashion and ethical shopping are becoming more well known. But, like you, I hope it's not just lip service. I listened to Alyson Walsh interview Patrick Grant in a recent That's Not My Age podcast. Grant talked of, among other things, a course he teaches to college students. He told of sharing with them the shocking statistics about fast fashion. They told him that they knew about fast fashion and that it was bad. But, then when he asked, they sheepishly admitted that despite this they still shop at H & M.
I've been shopping my closet for old things for years. Long before "shopping my closet" was even a thing. I did this because I can't bear to get rid of quality pieces unless they no longer fit. But I shouldn't pat myself on the back for that if I don't try to do more than what I've always done. That's too easy. Where's the change in that? Right?
I love this post, Frances. You write about this complex subject so much more eloquently and intelligently than I can. Well done.
This concept of slow fashion is something I've been pondering for awhile. I've never had an extensive wardrobe, but I've not been particularly concerned about the ethics of fashion until a few years ago. My daughter worked (she's on mat leave) in the fashion industry in Vancouver and even there it's a cutthroat and often dirty business.
I sew some of my clothes, and am beginning to take more notice of where and how fabrics are produced. Unfortunately, there is no law requiring fabric stores to disclose the source of their fabrics. In the larger chain stores, the managers don't even know where the fabrics originate.
When we have a consumer society, which thrives on citizens purchasing more and more, it's difficult to imagine how governments and economists will encourage people to spend less. The human cost of fast fashion is rarely considered by those who measure economic growth, yet wouldn't it be better for everyone, and for the earth, to become more considerate and deliberate in our spending, allowing those who produce our clothing to make a living wage, even if we have to spend more?
Thorny questions, indeed, and well worth grappling with.
If you want to buy secondhand or even keep your old clothes going as long as possible, a sewing machine is invaluable for repairs and for tailoring. And not just for clothes. I have turned torn or worn antique sheets into pillowcases–the cotton predates chemical agriculture and so is organic, and the perimeter fabric is still impeccable.
I just read an article about rewilding in Scotland and it made me think: agriculture has focused on getting us very cheap food but at high environmental cost. With food costs low, we have more disposable income, which we have been spending on disposable goods, especially clothes. I predict food costs are going to go way up and that clothing purchases will drop, perhaps out of environmental concern, perhaps for other reasons.
Individual choices DO make a huge difference. You can see it in the reaction to the coronavirus. It's deadly to elderly people who have other health issues; otherwise it's mostly like a cold or the flu. Yet Venice is a ghost town and economies are grinding to a crawl as people stay home–mostly individual decisions by people who are unlikely to catch COVID-19. Being of an age where elderly isn't far away, I don't take the virus lightly. I just mean to point out the huge effect a bunch of individual decisions can make.
Thanks for mentioning me. Your sketch,as well as your friend's one, are great and your essay is excellent and opens a lot of questions.
I'll quote once again translation of the poem The Waterfall from our poet Dobrisa Cesaric: It flows,flows and flows the waterfall
Does my little drop make any difference at all?
Look,a rainbow appears in it
And in thousands colours it appears shivering and lit!
My little drop helps to create
That dream in waterfall and makes it shine!
So,yes,little personal decisions help and make the difference (in both better or worse ways,depending on the decision) and are important. The question should be: What can I do for my family,my community,world today ,to make it a better place?
"The real me isn't the person I describe,the real me is revealed by my actions" M. Gladwell
We have to talk about these things,learn and find out what is really better and what is only a cosmetic change and than spread the knowledge around, still keeping the joy in our lives.
We'll see the impact of the epidemic on the industry-as we know that the majority of clothes is made in China,even protecting masks are imported from China and there is already shortage of them in my part of world
Dottoressa
A wonderfully thought provoking post Frances. The whole notion of conscience consumerism is a very meaty topic that many of us are all to well aware of. I often blame my younger self for the many purchases without thought. Now I feel the young of today could teach us a lesson on make do and mend.
How times have changed in the last two hundred years. Back in the day most people only owned two outfits. One for daily wear and one for best. Just linen under garments to wash. Thanks to media and the advertisements everywhere we are lulled into thinking everything is a must have. Of course all those companies producing our every day needs employ billions of people. How to change such a system.
Living on a small island I’m ever aware of the carbon footprint of very item I buy makes. At least with some foods I’m buying locally and our local charity shops often get a visit from us. Small changes but as they say every little helps. B x
Thoughtful comments all round and feeling of both hope and despair. We, however, have choice: A closet of things to shop, the money to buy locally made and fairly priced because we have the income and time to do so, we can choose natural fabrics again because we have the money to do so, search out the perfect vintage item, again requires not immediate need and time. Working 2 jobs? Single mum? Barely making enough to put food on the table? Slow fashion is not possible with growing kids, the need to dress like others….This is not to say we cannot contribute(in fact should work hard) to effect change but climate change is certainly a rich/poor issue.
This is such a full post, with so many aspects; thank you! . re the "hummingbird", I am heartened by so many women doing more to reduce consumption. (A related subject is the debate about Zero Growth, degrowth, or steady-state economic policy.)
The concrete steps I've taken are to keep a "No Shopping List", instead of a shopping list, so that I don't stockpile, old bad habit. I buy local or at least Canadian-made whenever possible (and will pay more to do it.) And no fast fashion. But, I don't boycott "clothing made from animal parts" as ASOS call it in the Kat George article on Huck. I wear, for example, wool from sheep and goats, down harvested from moulting birds. There are ethical issues with both natural and synthetic sources.
And I thrift, a return to a pursuit of my twenties; fifty years later it's still fun but much harder; there's so much junk, far far more than I remember when a student. It's clear women donate Ardene and H&M because it looks dreadful after several wears.
Thanks for the link, too!
Maryann: I agree, our desire for the new is continually stoked. Somehow, we need to change our response to the triggers since it seems they're not going away anytime soon.
Sue: Thanks for the nice words (and aw, shucks!) — I can easily believe that about the college students and I'm actually sympathetic. The pressures to be attractive and on trend are stronger at that age, if I remember correctly (so long ago!). . . and rather than model less consumption, many of us, old enough to know better (?), talk about buying fewer pieces of better quality but worry more about our diminishing visibility than how realistic that advice is to the generations following. I vehemently resent the #okayboomer tag, but sometimes I see where it comes from. . .
Lorrie: You have a front-row perspective, both as a sewist and as the mother of a designer. It's not easy, is it, but worth grappling with.
Taste of France: Yes, I think I say that fairly clearly, that individual choices make a difference — collectively and incrementally. I'm also saying that those bigger systemic changes are imperative but complex. You might be right about food vs. clothing costs, although I think that made be context-specific. Here in Vancouver (2nd least affordable housing in the world — vis-a-vis salaries), housing costs have already laid waste to disposable income — which might be why there's a lively vintage/thrifting scene in my 'hood 😉
Dottoressa: Thank you for the quotations, both Cesaric's and Gladwell's. Very apropos. And this sentence: We have to talk about these things,learn and find out what is really better and what is only a cosmetic change and than spread the knowledge around, still keeping the joy in our lives,. . . Yes, education, critical thinking, thoughtful sharing of ideas, and Keeping the Joy!
B: How times have changed in the last two hundred years. Back in the day most people only owned two outfits. One for daily wear and one for best. Just linen under garments to wash. Thanks to media and the advertisements everywhere we are lulled into thinking everything is a must have. Of course all those companies producing our every day needs employ billions of people. How to change such a system. Yes! Even 50 years ago, I know there were fewer kids' clothes in our family of 12 than I saw in my grandkids' house (family of 2). Granted, many, many of those clothes are hand-me-downs and well-worn. But even so, they encourage a sense of entitlement to abundance — or rather, not so much an entitlement as an expectation. As a corollary, of course, they also allow and encourage frequent laundering, which contributes heavily to environmental problems. Complex indeed.
Laura J: Crucially important recognition here. We've created (or allowed to have foisted on us, but I'd say there's complicity we shouldn't deny) a situation which makes it feel necessary to keep up appearances. And on a limited budget (of time, money, energy), that need gets met by fast fashion. It's hard to be UnFashionable (ask me how I know — my parents refused to purchase according to trends), but I think those of us who Have need to do more to show how that could be done while still finding the Joy.
Duchesse: I'm the same with animal-based fabrics, believing that petroleum-based synthetics wreak havoc on animals' homes in ways that make those textiles a questionable alternative. And I've yet to find a plant-based textile that traps body heat well. . . .
What you say about the changes to thrifting is so true. Contributions over the past twenty years become increasingly less attractive — and the very fast fashion cycle means many trends with no staying power. . . .Thanks again for your interesting post on Rebecca Burgess and her aspirational style.
I can't help but think about Michael Pollan's "In Defense of Food."
"Eat food, not too much, mostly plants." Those six words have sparked an awareness, worldwide, of the hidden costs of processed foods and agribusiness, and how we need to eschew the fast and easy for the good of our planet and our selves. I hope we're on a similar path with fashion – I wonder if there are six words we could employ?
Great post, as always. This is a topic I spend a lot of time thinking about. As Maryann and Duchesse both said, there is a wider economic question around the idea of growth – a sustainable economy has to be circular, unlike what we have now. I oscillate between hope and despair too, often thinking that the little things I do matter not at all. But I keep doing them. I buy less and the last few items of clothing I’ve bought have been secondhand. I mend and fix. I don’t eat meat or poultry and try to eat sustainable seafood and shop local. I still feel like it’s not enough; I still find myself wanting things, wanting something new and pretty. I was joking to a friend about a party I went to last weekend wearing a gold shirt, and she said ‘Oh, your party shirt’ and I felt embarrassed for a moment that everyone knows I only have one party shirt … But then I reflected on the fact that I probably go to three parties a year – why do I need more than one shirt? (And it’s a great shirt …)
@ Tiffany: That's the old paradigm (re your shirt), and it still has power, especially when we're not expecting it. It is also subtly sexist; no one says that to a man in a dark suit. I say good for you!
So true what Duchesse says – a man in a dark suit wouldn't be criticised, and a male wardrobe of a few pieces is called stylish. The older I get the more I'm fatigued by fashion, and resent the strident pressure to buy. I was discussing with my son this week the doom and gloom that accompanies retail figures that haven't grown season on season. Why do we need to consume more all the time? Answer – to satisfy shareholders. It helps my non-fashion buying to be living now in a rural area where practicality rules. Since I can't sew or knit my slow fashion would have to come from charity shops and ethical producers. The charity shops in my area would be fine if I wanted to dress in a 'style that time forgot', which I don't. Which brings me back to the tyranny of fashion. I don't want it, but I'm still ruled by it.
Thank you for coming back to this discussion. I loved the piece about Vivienne Westwood, and particularly a quote from her husband stuck with me: „We already have enough clothes in the western world to last us for hundreds of years.“ I think that is very true, although, obviously, these clothes are not distributed evenly. But personally I feel that the clothes I have now will probably last for the rest of my life (with the exception of a little underwear).
But this does not mean that I do not care how I present myself to the eyes of the world. After all, following ideas about women, age, and visibility was how I found this blog and the wonderful community that comes with it. But I have come to realise that I do not need new things in order to create a look that satisfies me. I am not going to repeat any of the brilliant ideas that have been mentioned here: recombining, mending, upcycling… and a little bit of hand-made slow fashion. The other day a friend greeted me in the street saying: „I knew it was you from far away, because I recognised your hat.“ I made that hat to match the colours of a scarf, with yarns from my stash and patterns of my own design.So it is one of a kind. That is the right sort of visibility for me.
Fascinating post and a great read. I’m trying to do my bit and haven’t bought new clothes for six months now (not that I ever bought much). I am mending, rediscovering items long forgotten, and occasionally buying from charity shops. But most of us don’t ‘need’ anything do we.
Carolpres: I've liked Michael Pollan's advice since I first heard it for its succinctness — but it's rather ascetic, isn't it? In his Omnivore's Dilemma there was considerable acknowledgement of the pleasures of food, and I could wish for a few words in his aphorism that would nod to that. . . And I'd be sad to lose the pleasures that dressing oneself can entail. If only, we can find our way back to having those on a more sustainable scale.
Tiffany: I bet your gold shirt is fabulous and I bet you look great in it. Were you at all tempted to fit in some kind of humble brag about your environmental conscience 😉
Linda B: You put your finger on something here — while some don't mind stepping off the fashion escalator completely (and the countryside perhaps could accommodate you doing that), some of us still want to keep a credibly shod foot in a world where it matters. A tricky line to walk. . . .
Eleonore: I love this. That is the right sort of visibility for me Having had the pleasure of your company on both my visits to Germany, I know you have a distinctive style–creative, but without demanding attention, eclectically elegant.
Gina: We really don't need, you're absolutely right. I'm not going to beat myself up for occasionally buying something new, but I can't fool myself that it's a need rather than a want. Good for you with your mending and thrifting and rediscovering in your own closet.
"Eclectically elegant", I love that. Thank you.
Your friend’s sketch is superb and your drawing of the coat conveys its gorgeous, simple lines and substantial fabric. The Missoni-esque suit is fabulous. Thank you for posting more photos of this delightful exhibition. Vancouver fashion was sensational last Century and I suspect that several other places had similarly strong fashion industries last century. I mourn all that we have lost in the quality of design, fabric, tailoring and workmanship. Now for the hard stuff. So much to think about and so hard to know what individuals can do to effect the most change. I agree with others who have pointed to the folly of economic strategies based on endless growth – that kind of thinking is ruining our environment and the ceaseless quest for ever increasing profit is ruining job satisfaction, if not lives, as employers impose increasingly unreasonable demands on workers, in relation to types of tasks performed, hours worked and remuneration. I love the hummingbird story and the treatise on the bathroom wall. I need to believe that individual contributions can make a difference and consider that some optimism is essential for survival. Individuals and businesses in Australia and in other countries responded wonderfully to assist communities devastated by our recent bushfires. It was heartwarming to see and to be a part of and makes me feel hopeful.
There is an assumption here that people can own clothes that can last ten years; so many have never been able to afford that and probably never will. We must also think about the underlying issues of economic inequality that forces people to buy cheap clothes that last a season — they do need to buy something new. They also often live in food deserts where plant based food is too expensive. Those of us who can afford to buy clothes that last and have access food products that are less harmful to the environment also need to think about our neighbors who cannot.
I cannot believe everyone's going out to buy new sewing machines when there are approximately 8 zillion of them sitting in the basements of the world, gathering dust! One of my best purchases was my Husqvarna Viking 190, from the late 70s, purchased on Etsy from a woman who'd used the machine well.
Both Linda B and Lynn touched on my thinking as I read Frances’ blog and the comments that followed. I, too, live in a rural area in which the residents rely on the fast fashion offered by the box stores. Our local thrift stores are chock full of the styles “that time forgot” (Thanks, Linda B for that phrase) that I wouldn’t have bought in the first place. I have been resisting purchasing clothing online because I want to support our two, yes, only two local brick and mortar clothing stores that are about 60 minutes apart. (Sorry I think in time, not miles.) Without them our local teens, college students and older women supplementing the family income would be hard pressed to find something else. The next closest shopping area is between 90 minutes away from my house. Also, there is little discussion in all of the sites, not just this one, of the damage that generational poverty has on peoples’ perception of themselves, their lives, and the future. So, I hope those of us who CAN afford sustainable clothing, goods, quality food, and can practice more ethical consumerism make sure we do not become smug about our good deeds. We are lucky to have such choices.
Maria: Yes, that example of the hummingbird is close, for you, with your massive wildfires to extinguish. It is heartening to see what individuals can do to help — of course, the forest fires also provide an example where massive systemic change is needed, as they seem an undeniable result of global warming.. .
Lynn: This is why I think it's important to recognize that systemic change is needed, and that as individuals we can only do our best within that framework. And I think we do need to examine our assumptions about how long clothes last and who can afford that and why and how to care for them, as well as the way clothing style and fashion convey class status, the way those of us who enjoy privilege benefit from that and the ways we might help make that linkage (fashion/style/class) less onerous for those less privileged. . . . I'd like to follow up on this in a future post.
K: Right?! And the learning curve on the older machines (provided they're in good repair) is so much gentler. My Husqvarna Viking (bought from Eaton's, late 70s, $400 on sale, a huge budget-hit at the time but one of my best buys ever) doesn't get used much these days but still works very well.
Anonymous: These are all good points which emphasize how multi-layered and complex this issue of responsible consumerism can be — and how unfair it can be to exhort prescribed individual responses. Exactly why I wanted to emphasize that we can only do our best as individuals, that we urgently need movement to "roots and branches" change, systemic change. I know I don't feel smug at all about any good deeds, but I do think that those of us who can afford to do better really should — and that part of that "better" should be careful about flaunting our good fortune in large wardrobes, complicit in perpetuating the "aspirational culture" in which "the acquisition of the right goods is the pinnacle of self-empowerment."
— For future comments (because I do hope you'll be back again), consider using the "Anonymous" option exactly as you did here, but at the end of your comment add a first name or pseudonym, as Maryann and Dottoressa have done above. That way, yours can become a recognizable voice in our ongoing conversation. If you'd prefer not to do that, you're still perfectly welcome to comment, but over the years I've found that we feel more like a community with some kind of handle. 😉
Back to say I think you're spot on re the sewing machines. A friend gave me hers, she is only here in summer so the plan is we will share it. I have not touched it! I realized I'd make "stuff" and also build a fabric stash. Though other friends find sewing a satisfying hobby, I can't wait to hand it back to her.
Duchesse: I was so sure I'd get using mine again in retirement, but it's almost five years now. . . I did some with Nola, but otherwise, still waiting. . .