Here are a few of the many tatting books I've collected over the years. These are all mostly old Star magazines. They are in fairly fragile condition so I try not to handle them too much. After looking through all my tatting books the other day I noticed that it seems like tatting of old did not have the same standards we use today. I could be wrong but I look at a lot of old tatting pictures and can see many mistakes and it just doesn't seem to be as neat and tidy as examples I see in new books. Needless to say that a lot of the old patterns leave a lot to be desired in the way of accuracy. Have we raised our standards? Perhaps it is the thread we use that makes a difference. I know that my newly purchased thread tats a lot better than my vintage thread. I don't know what makes the difference and I certainly don't intend to be insulting to my foremother's. It's just that I push myself to get better every time I tat and I hope that we tatter's do hold our work to the highest standards possible!
1 comment:
I think one of the reasons there are so many inaccuracies in the old pattern books is that perhaps because there weren't as many tatters as say, knitters or crocheters, the editors of the mags and booklets didn't have a clue what they were reading/editting so they just published it anyway. Now-a-days we have so many more people who tat and design and won't put up with inaccuracies and strive to come up with a universal "language of tatting" so everyone can understand.
Post a Comment