Domestic Dexterity and Cultural Policy. the Idea of Cottage Industry And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN EDUCATION, PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIAL RESEARCH 544 Eliza Kraatari Domestic Dexterity and Cultural Policy The Idea of Cottage Industry and Historical Experience in Finland from the Great Famine to the Reconstruction Period JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN EDUCATION, PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIAL RESEARCH 544 Eliza Kraatari Domestic Dexterity and Cultural Policy The Idea of Cottage Industry and Historical Experience in Finland from the Great Famine to the Reconstruction Period Esitetään Jyväskylän yliopiston yhteiskuntatieteellisen tiedekunnan suostumuksella julkisesti tarkastettavaksi yliopiston Vanhassa juhlasalissa (S212) tammikuun 16. päivänä 2016 kello 12. Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by permission of the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Jyväskylä, in building Seminarium, auditorium S212, on January 16, 2016 at 12 o’clock noon. UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ JYVÄSKYLÄ 2016 Domestic Dexterity and Cultural Policy The Idea of Cottage Industry and Historical Experience in Finland from the Great Famine to the Reconstruction Period JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN EDUCATION, PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIAL RESEARCH 544 Eliza Kraatari Domestic Dexterity and Cultural Policy The Idea of Cottage Industry and Historical Experience in Finland from the Great Famine to the Reconstruction Period UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ JYVÄSKYLÄ 2016 Editors Olli-Pekka Moisio Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of Jyväskylä Pekka Olsbo Publishing Unit, University Library of Jyväskylä Cover picture: Otto Mäkilä (1904–55), He näkevät mitä me emme näe [They see what we cannot see], 1939, oil on canvas, 90 x 117 cm. Turku Art Museum (photograph: Vesa Aaltonen). URN:ISBN:978-951-39-6456-6 ISBN 978-951-39-6456-6 (PDF) ISBN 978-951-39-6455-9 (nid.) ISSN 0075-4625 Copyright © 2016, by University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä University Printing House, Jyväskylä 2016 ABSTRACT Kraatari, Eliza Domestic Dexterity and Cultural Policy. The Idea of Cottage Industry and Historical Experience in Finland from the Great Famine to the Reconstruction Period Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 2016, 246 p. (Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research ISSN 0075-4625; 544) ISBN 978-951-39-6455-9 (nid.) ISBN 978-951-39-6456-6 (PDF) The concept of cottage industry (kotiteollisuus) referred especially to rural craft practices. For the promotion of cottage industries, a state administrative organ and a network of cottage industry associations and schools were established. A sphere developed and monitored by specialists, cottage industry policies were planned as official committee work. However, the matter was usually addressed as ‘the idea of cottage industry’ (kotiteollisuusaate). In this study, the historical idea of cottage industry and its cultural and political backgrounds are analysed. The starting point of the investigation is in the post-WWII Cottage Industry Production Committee, but from its years of activity, 1944–1949, the study moves on to the emergence and establishment of the idea of cottage industry and the respective policy line in the late 19th and the early 20th centuries. The study scrutinises, who promoted cottage industries and what their cultural, social, and ideological backgrounds were, and how they influenced the construction of cottage industry policy. Research work builds on the microhistorical research angle making use of textual details in the 1949 committee report. Following the clue method, historical sources are analysed, including earlier committee reports, newspaper articles, meeting and exhibition documents, small publications, and personal archives. Through the notion of historical experience, special attention is paid to the continuity and recollection of the idea of cottage industry as it was expressed by the 1944–1949 committee members in the magazine Kotiteollisuus. The study found that cottage industry created a 19th-century administrative and political concept that was applied in the first instance to manage critical situations caused by crop failures and other societal hardships. Especially in the aftermath of the WWII, cottage industry was essentially conceived of as a cultural political measure to balance the society facing large settlement and land acquisition projects by creating a sense of cultural continuity through the means of domestic craft practices. The historical idea of cottage industry and the respective sphere of administration summoned a remarkable cultural political factor that has strongly affected Finnish craft culture. Keywords: cottage industry, history of cultural policy, cultural history, history of ideas, microhistory, historical experience, historical trauma, craft history, heritage policy, 19th-century Finland, 1860s’ famine, reconstruction period Author’s address Eliza Kraatari Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy Cultural Policy P. O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä Supervisors Professor Anita Kangas Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy University of Jyväskylä Professor Mika Ojakangas Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy University of Jyväskylä Reviewers University Lecturer Juri Mykkänen Professor Vesa Vares Opponent Juri Mykkänen PROLOGUE A dissertation project is comparable to many things; it is like a journey, a dance of some sort, a long-distance run or a challenging yoga asana. For me, it has been comparable to a backcountry skiing trip, demanding and enjoyable at the same time. Writing these lines, I think about skiing up a snowy hill, pushing through fluffy snow drifts. Climbing up slowly the hill-side, I would know that from the top of the hill scenery over southern Lapland opens. With the wind humming quietly, I would watch the view stretching from the Bay of Bothnia to the Pisa nature reservation area. I would see a quilt of forests and peatlands, and I would try to catch a glimpse of the Kemi River somewhere between them. I then would retreat to the tepee-like kota, build a small fire and spend a moment writing in my diary that I carry with me in the map bag. Today, the topic is my PhD work. The years that I have spent working on my dissertation have created one of the happiest periods in my life. I am taking it to its conclusion thankfully. First of all, I would like to thank Professor Anita Kangas, not only for su- pervising my work, but for giving the needed impetus to start the process. Anita has sometimes pushed me to the limits of my abilities and helped me to find abilities that I had not been aware of. At times, when my belief has been weak, she has been supportive and believed in my work. Thank you for sharing your Ostrobothnian courage! I thank my other supervisors, Professor Mika Ojakangas for useful and practical advice, and Mikko Jakonen for having assiduously read and com- mented versions of my texts. I thank Professor Vesa Vares for commenting and reviewing the manuscript and Juri Mykkänen for the review and for accepting to work as the opponent. Jyväskylä has been a good place for doing research. The resources at hand at the University Library have been invaluable for the work and I have been kindly helped to access various files; including some already fragile documents with the characteristic smell of old archived paper. Moreover, archives of the Craft Museum of Finland that is also located in Jyväskylä have been readily at my use. I would like to thank amanuenses Seija Hahl for discussions and Anneli Hemmilä-Nurmi for helping me with the pictures; I sincerely thank the Craft Museum of Finland for letting me freely use their picture archive in this book. I thank amanuensis Riitta Salmenoja for helping me with the archives and in par- ticular for bringing me to the collections of Hulda Kontturi. I am thankful for the Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy at the University of Jyväskylä for the opportunity to work continuously and full-time with my dissertation project. I thank the Sovako multidisciplinary doctoral pro- gramme in cultural policy and the Emil Aaltonen Foundation for funding the project. I would like to thank people at the Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, especially colleagues in cultural policy; Sakarias Sokka for discus- sions about doing historical research and Egge Kulbok-Lattik for sharing the work space and the many splendid conversations. I also thank Onni Pekonen for discussions about the development of meeting practices in the turn of the 20th century. Professor Marja Keränen I would like to thank for kindness and good advice. The many doctoral seminars have been helpful for me to progress with the research work. I therefore thank for the comments received and for the great, collegial atmosphere achieved especially at the Sovako doctoral seminars; cheers to Professor Saara L. Taalas and to fellows in PhD research, Mikko Kara- iste, Aura Seikkula and Juhana Venäläinen. I would not have found the path to research without the initial learning experiences at the University of Lapland in Rovaniemi. In the course of my PhD studies, I kept returning to Rovaniemi to attend the cultural history researcher seminars hosted ever so heartily by Professor Marja Tuominen – I am exceed- ingly thankful to Marja, not only for discussions regarding this research project but for the inspiration to study and research cultural history. For researchers who are time after time enthralled by findings in the ar- chival sources and inspired by research literature, the scholar work as such can be a source of joy. But – to quote my late grandmother – what’s the soup with- out the potatoes! Thus, I wish to address my warmest gratitude to friends that I have had the pleasure to learn to know. Riikka Aro and Sanna Vierimaa, to- gether we have shared great moments that live in memories. I heartily thank you Päivi Kivelä, Eerika Koskinen-Koivisto, Kaisu Kumpulainen, Miikka Salo, Minna Ylilahti and Maija Väätämöinen for sharing your life experience and sense of humour with me. A special thank you goes to my dear friends Riikka Matala, Elina Nurmela, Juha-Matti Tammela and Minttu Väisänen. You have been there in laughter and in sorrow – our friendships shall continue to flourish! Finally, I want to express my gratitude to my family.