Chapter 7 Knitting as a Cultural and Bodily Practice Ritva Koskennurmi-Sivonen, Marja Anttila & Hennariikka Virtanen Introduction At the beginning of the 21st century, knitting is again extremely popular. It en- joys a vivid renaissance and is trendy in many ways that one could hardly have imagined a few decades ago. “Celebrity knitting” is one of the phenomena that fuel the popularity of knitting. When Hollywood stars knit—and do it in pub- lic—they lend their glamour to this practice so often connected with tradition and female domesticity. (Parkins, 2004; see also Hosegood 2006, pp. 75–79; Stoller, 2003, p. 14; www.worldknit.com/celebrityknitters.html) On the home front, the new popularity of knitting and its competition with other domestic ac- tivities is humorously captured in the title of Betsy Hosegood’s book (2006): Not Tonight Darling, I’m Knitting. Figure 1. Albert Edelfelt: A girl knitting a sock, 1886. (Gösta Serlach- iuksen taidesäätiö. Mänttä, Finland). In craft science and textile and clothing teacher education, knitting skills have always been taught, and knitting has been an object of study from different points of view. Knitted garments have been studied as traditional craft (Almay, Luutonen & Mitronen, 1993; Luutonen, 1997), designing knitted garments has been studied as a profession (Luutonen, 1999), and knitting appears in one way or other in several studies of women’s crafts. Knitting as an activity of the hands has also been studied in relation to mental well-being (Vähälä 2003). There are also a number master’s theses with a focus on knitting. However, there is no comprehensive and profound study of basic knitting skills to inform research- based teaching. Furthermore, knitting skills have not been considered to be un- important. Rather, they have been considered to be self-evident, as most Finnish women—and some men—know how to knit. In addition, manual skills as such have not been a popular research object in craft science, probably in the fear that focusing on manual skills might reduce craft, or the image of craft, to that of mere manual skill, if not dexterity. In this article, we conceive knitting as a cultural and bodily practice. The art of making knitted artifacts consists of a number of human faculties and phases of work, such as developing ideas for products and their properties, fa- miliarity with materials and tools and their suitability for the project, designing patterns of the product, designing stitch patterns and surface texture, calculating stitches and adapting the stitch pattern to the product pattern (dimensions and shapes), seaming separately knitted pieces and hemming the edges, finalizing the surface, and finally, knitting as a technique of producing stitches. This tech- nique is adopted in a socio-cultural setting and adapted to one’s own body— seemingly to one’s hands, but having an effect on the whole upper body. We fo- cus on this last point, the act of knitting with yarn and needles. From our own experience of knitting and the teaching of it, we knew that Finnish women probably knit using the so-called continental method, with yarn in the left hand, which is one of the three basic methods used around the world. We also knew that what we suggest as an easy, fluent, relaxed and ergonomic position for hand knitting is not adopted by all knitters. However, we did not know exactly what kinds of variations—that is, knitting positions—of this method are used and what knitters’ own experiences of their work might be. This is why we carried out an extensive study in order to obtain a well-grounded (quantitative) overview and (qualitative) understanding of how people knit in Finland and why they knit as they do. We do not seek one “correct” way of knit- ting; rather our aim is to find research-based arguments for our teaching and our suggestions for future teachers who carry on this traditional textile technique. Individual and Cultural Skill On the one hand, skills constitute highly individual qualities of a human being. This means that one can give away material and immaterial products of one’s skill and one can share knowledge about skill, and demonstrate it; but, skill as such cannot be transferred from person to person. On the other hand, skills are cultural artifacts in the sense that they are developed in cultural contexts. A hu- man being has a readiness to acquire skills, but which skills are relevant to be exercised highly depends on the socio-cultural environment. As Niiniluoto (1993, p. 11) notes, besides experience, certain background knowledge is a pre- requisite of skills. They cannot be acquired a priori, independent of experience. One needs to have an active interaction with surroundings in order to acquire that knowledge. Keller and Keller (1999, 30) give a good example of an extremely fruitful environment in their study of an artist blacksmith’s workshop and tool use. They argue that cultural competence, continuity of tradition, and viable innovation are rooted in visual cognition. Technical tools are psychological tools used in the construction and manipulation of visual concepts. The skillful use of technology requires a stock of images and the capacity to construct reasoned connections among them. This visual stock is the primary mental content of the tradition. Thus Keller and Keller demonstrate that the conceptual flow and structure are primarily visual and rooted in technical tool use. Elsewhere in their study of the blacksmith’s skill, Keller and Keller (1999, p. 9) present even more interesting connection between the maker, material and tool use, which is summarized in three principles: transformation, think hot, and work freehand. Transformation refers to changing forms and dimensions of raw material to a desired shape. Think hot refers to the accomplishment of those transformations while the iron is in a plastic state. Work freehand refers to the preference for use of hand-guided tools of risk. In spite of the completely different material, these principles are applicable to knitting. Transformation is obvious when shaping any material, but we might guide a learner to think wool, for example, when highlighting the nature of yarn in a knitting process. Hand knitting is indeed working freehand, as everything is controlled by hand, and routine and consistency in that control is vital for the re- sult. Several scholars have proposed divisions of human skills. We only site two of these divisions. Romiszowski (1999, pp. 462–463) divides skilled activity into four categories: cognitive skills, psychomotor skills, reactive skills, and in- teractive skills. Furthermore, he suggests a continuum of reproductive-to- productive skills. According to this division, the basic act of knitting is repro- ductive psychomotor skill. At its best it is repetitive and automated. When it is mastered, it allows for the development of productive knitting skill, for example, making non-routine details, which is linked with cognitive skill but which still demands psychomotor skill for that matter. This distinction is akin to Scheffler’s (1965, pp. 91–105) classical distinction between facilities, which may also be termed routinizable skills, and critical skills. Both are needed in craft, but prac- ticing routine seems to be a great challenge in the present era of impatience. Fitts proposed a useful and very influential framework for skill acquisition in the 1960s. Based on his observations that different cognitive processes are in- volved at different stages of learning, he distinguished three phases: cognitive, associative, and autonomous. Early in the learning of skills, the learner uses cognitive processes to understand the nature of the task and how it should be performed. After the instructions have been learned and task expectations are understood, the learner enters the associative phase. In this phase, inputs are linked more directly to appropriate action, and the need for verbal mediation is diminished. When task performance has reached the autonomous phase, it is said to be automatic. It no longer requires conscious control. To reach this phase may take months or years, but once it has been reached, an automated task can be performed concurrently with many other activities. (Proctor & Dutta, 1995, p. 15) These phases can be distinguished in the acquisition of knitting skills, al- though the transition from phase to phase in not always clearly identified. Fitts also observed that the transition is gradual rather than being marked by an abrupt shift. Fragmented History of Knitting The origin of the hand knitting technique is unknown. One of the earliest find- ings is a pair of Coptic, or Romano-Egyptian, socks from the 5th century (Rutt, 1987, p. 31). It is probable that Arabs introduced the knitting technique to Euro- peans after they had conquered Egypt and continued on to the southern parts of Europe. However, Europeans who had grown used to woven material were re- luctant to adopt this new method of making textiles. Knitting was generally known only in the late Middle Ages, from which period there are only occa- sional findings but no clear evidence of how the skill spread across Europe. The most important knitted products were gloves and socks, which remained luxury items for the wealthy, while the poor continued to use cloth hose. (Snidare, 1991, pp. 10–11; Tarrant, 1994, p. 92) A fragment of Egyptian knitted cotton from 1000–1200 AD (Rutt, 1987, p. 35) and a Spanish glove from the first half of the 13th century (Schoeser, 2003, p. 78) have been made in multi-colored pattern knit. Both of these indicate well- established skill. At least three religious Italian paintings and one German paint- ing from the 14th century depict the Madonna knitting with five needles in her hands. In the German painting, four needles are around the neckline of the oth- erwise finished garment.