another knitting blog

Tomorrow, tomorrow

I'm going to the Maryland Sheep & Wool Festival tomorrow. Needless to say, I am looking forward to it.

The explanation

So, where did this odd little exercise come from and what does it mean?

On Tuesday, I was pulling into the parking lot at work while the driver in the car in front of me was attempting, rather inexpertly, to back into a parking space. The maneuver took a long time and took up a lot of space.

I pulled into a parking space, hopped out of my car and was on my way to work while she was still futzing with straightening out her car. At that moment, I said to myself with a huff, "There are two kinds of people in this world: People who pull into parking spaces and people who back into parking spaces".

Then I immediately said to myself, "Whoa! Where did that come from?" Was the situation so simple? What did I mean by that and what did that comment reveal about me? [We might also ask why I was in such a surly mood, but that's another story].

After a little reflection, I concluded that if I thought there were two kinds of people, what I really meant was: People who get in my way and annoy me and people who don't. [Add to this group people who park their grocery carts in the middle of the aisle and people who try to get on the elevator before letting other people get off].

This is apparently a major peeve for me. But is this really how I see the world? Do I evaluate others around me like this all the time? Why as I so impatient? [I have a long walk from the parking lot to the building. Lots of ponder time].

I then tried to think of any other reductionistic dichotomies I might come up with see if they revealed anything else about my peeves or prejudices. It wasn't easy to do because once I really started to think about it, it wasn't easy to reduce things to a simple either/or. As soon as I came up with a candidate, I would think, "Yeah, but... ."

We are judging and evaluating all the time about every thing around us. Mmm, this coffee is good. These eggs are too runny. I like the color of that man's shirt. He'd look better with a haircut though. We evaluate ideas too. We agree or disagree with other people. We have opinions, take sides, root for 'our' team.

But with all this judging going on, how often are the judgments clear cut? If forced to sort the world into neat black and white boxes, which boxes do we choose? What, if anything, would that reveal about us? I thought I'd ask other people and see if it revealed any thing about them.

Answers I got from my coworkers:

Reds and blues

Winners and losers

Optimists and pessimists

Givers and takers

Those who believe there are only two kinds of people and those who don't

So, do these answers say anything about the people who gave them? Let's see.

Reds and blues: politically aware reading a recent series or Washington Post articles [reg. req.]

Givers and takers: recently divorced

Those who believe there are only two kinds of people and those who don't: highly analytical scientist

However, this is a bit like reading your horoscope; because I already know a lot about these people, I can make guesses about what motivated their answers. Also, these interpretations are pretty superficial. I haven't learned a deep truth about anyone.

Some of your answers [thanks to those of you who answered]:

knitters and non-knitters [of course!]

Glass half fulls and Glass half empties

Cat people and dog people

those with faith, and those without faith

those on the sidelines, and those in the game

Without knowing any of you well, I don't have a good chance of divining the source of these answers.

For instance, Marmy's answer: boys and girls. This could mean that she is savoring the differences between the two, or that she is exasperated with some particular guy, or that she was just looking for the most straightforward answer to a slippery question.

In the end, it's too simple to try and fit the world into a neat black and white dichotomy. Most of the time, we are required to live in the gray. There really aren't two kinds of people. There are as many kinds of people as there are people.

This whole exercise is probably meaningless, but potentially interesting, and I found it to be reasonably entertaining. Sorry if it hasn't turned out to be as interesting to you. I did find that when I asked the people I knew that I was intrigued by the answers and had fun trying to interpret them. Try this on some people you know. You may find the answers amusing or surprising.

06:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (10)

April 27, 2004

Fill in the blanks

There are two types of people in the world: _______________ and ______________.

Doesn't have to be knitting related.
I'll explain later.

02:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (28)

April 24, 2004

Seeking Steeking

I've gotten a couple of questions about steeks. I am certainly no expert, but I know who is. Please accept this humble post on steeking.

First, what is a steek?

A steek is a set of stitches in circular knitting that you will cut later to create openings for armholes, necks, or cardigan fronts. Steeks are most often used in stranded knitting where they eliminate the need to purl in two colors (i.e., the body is knit circularly all the way to the shoulders); however, they can be used in a wide variety of designs.

They work best with rough, sticky yarns like Shetland wool, but they can also be employed successfully with smoother wools and even cotton yarn if sufficient care is taken to secure the stitches before cutting with machine stitching.

A while back, I did some research in my knitting books about the origin of the work 'steek' and wrote this:

In her book on Fair Isle knitting (first printed in 1988 and now OOP), AS says, "Steek is a Scottish word meaning 'to fasten or close'." In her 1978 book, Scandinavian Knitwear, AS's stranded designs are worked back and forth in flat pieces. It is unclear, however, whether this is simply because steeks were not used in the traditional designs on which the newer designs were based (less likely), or whether they weren't included for editorial reasons (more likely). Given her Hebridean background, it seems unlikely that AS wouldn't already have been exposed to steeks in the context of Fair Isle designs. In Sweaters from Camp, Meg Swansen acknowledges the controversy about the source of the term, and attributes the origin of the Scottish meaning to Shelia McGregor (most likely given in her OOP 1982 book The Complete Book of Traditional Fair Isle Knitting). In The Art of Fair Isle Knitting, Ann Feitleson proposes that the practice of steeking was introduced to the Shetlands sometime in the early 1940s and that the practice may have been learned from Norwegian refugees.

In response, I got the following comment from Linda:

Steek is not a word used in common usage in Scotland today. It's a Flemish word which can still be found in Dutch dictionaries. There was a lot of Flemish immigration into Scotland especially of craftsmen and weavers. For an overview see: http://amg1.net/fleminfl.html

Well, that clears it right up.

Let's see what the real steek experts have to say.

On the Schoolhouse Press website, Meg Swansen provides an excerpt from Sweaters from Camp about steeking. Lots of good information here, including black and white pictures of how to crochet steeks.

Of course, when you think of a steeking expert Wendy comes to mind. Among the many helpful resources she provides are examples of Norwegian-style front and arm steeks and Fair Isle-style arm and neck steeks.

Lucy Neatby has a nice page on steeks that has tips and illustrations.

Finally, Lisa has an excellent page on crocheted steeks with color close-ups. Lisa's crochet chains are close together; her technique only uses the middle three stitches of her seven-stitch steeks.

I'm a bit of a chicken. If you look at the first picture of my April 18th post, you can see that I am using the middle seven stitches of an eleven-stitch steek. This gives me a bit more leeway when I'm cutting. However, it's also very easy for me to see where to cut because I use an odd number of stitches and purl the middles stitch [Thanks, Tanya]. That gives me a clear little ditch to snip.

Being no expert, I'm sure I've probably messed something up and I know I haven't really begun to cover this topic.

08:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

April 21, 2004

snip snip

I took Rain Forest to the Knitting Meetup tonight and cut the neck steeks.

I did it partly to inform, partly to inspire, and partly to amaze. I'm still amazed enough by it myself that it's fun to do with other people watching.

In response to some recent comments:

Melissa asks, "Do you usually use a crochet steek? Do you ever use a sewing machine?"

It's hard for me to say I usually do anything with steeks; this is only the third time I've done a sweater with them and only the second time I've done a sweater in Shetland yarn. I crocheted the steeks on the first Fair Isle sweater I knit and was pleased with the results. I don't own a sewing machine; so I brought my Philospher's Wool sweater to a friend who sewed the steeks on her machine. I hand sewed around the neck opening.

Crocheting the steeks may not be necessary with nice sticky Shetland yarn, but it's not very difficult to do and contributes significantly to ones piece of mind when you don't have a lot of experience with cutting up your knitting.

Emma says, "Don't worry about the shoulders [on Rain Forest].Only really tall people will see,and I doubt they'd consider it worthy of remark !"

Well, I hope to occasionally sit down while wearing this sweater and that will throw me open to potential criticism from insensitive clods of all heights!

Seriously though, I am increasingly pleased with this sweater and when it's finished I think it will be quite worthy of remarks—all good ones. [hee]

08:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

April 18, 2004

Rain Forest grows

Boy, last week was a pathetic blog week. Let's see if the coming week will be any better.

Yesterday was another meeting of K2P2, and as always, it was enjoyable. I mostly worked on securing my steeks with a crochet chain stitch. Perhaps not necessary, but comforting just the same.

The pattern indicates that the last row at the shoulders should be worked in the background color only. However, when I did that, it was too noticeable, so I went back and redid it with both colors. I didn't take a picture before I ripped it out, but believe me, this looks better.

The sweater I saw made up in the store was a size larger. The flowers on the shoulders of that size met up perfectly. Too bad that this size doesn't do the same.

The next step: cutting the steeks.

07:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

April 14, 2004

Knitting Everyday

...but, obviously, not blogging everyday.

However, today I will start blogging Everyday.

No, not blogging everyday. Blogging Everyday. Everyday Cardigan.

After satisfying myself for several weeks just gazing lovingly at my Peace Fleece, I have finally begun to knit my Everyday Cardigan.

I now also see the benefit of a knit-along. I've been following the progress that other cardigan knitters have been making over at the Everyday Cardigan Knit-a-long page.

One issue that has come up is directions for the ribbing. I am making the third size, which has you cast on 96 stitches and then begin a K2, P2 rib. Back when she presented her finished Everyday, Leigh pointed out the problem with this: with an even number of stitches divisible by 4, the ribbing will begin with K2 on one side of the piece and end with P2 on the other. Not symmetric and not ideal when it comes to seaming as this puts one knit stitch and one purl stitch in the seam.

I've tried to illustrate the situation here. I hope it's not too complicated. This is probably more information than anyone wants.

The stitches in the brackets represent the front and the back. As the pattern is written, where the two pieces come together there are two Ks on the left piece and two Ps on the right. When the two pieces are seamed, the stitches in the middle (shown here in italics) will disappear into the seam bringing together the stitches in bold.

But wait, that's not right. There's just one K and one P.

[P P K K P P K K P P K K][P P K K P P K K P P K K]

My solution: First, you know I'm going to start by adding two extra stitches anyway. The pattern doesn't specify a selvedge so I'm going to add my own: knit the first and last stitch of every row. I cast on 98 stitches for the back.

Second, I started my ribbing with K1 after the selvedge stitch. That means that the ribbing will end with a K1 before the selvedge stitch on the other end.

[S K P P K K P P K K P P K S][S K P P K K P P K K P P K S]

Now, when I seam (using mattress stitch, of course), the selvedge stitches will disappear bringing the two single Ks together and continuing the K2, P2 ribbing all the way around.

Hooray!

["I claim this knitting in the name of sad-eyed cats everywhere. You cannot resist us."]

06:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)

April 08, 2004

Chinese Proverb

From yoga class tonight:

'Tension' is who we think we should be,
'Relaxation' is who we are.

07:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

April 06, 2004

The Knitter Who Couldn't Start or Finish

[I know that this is going to be one of those posts that prompts my friend Ellen to email me and say, "Get over yourself!" I can sense her virtual eye rolling even now].

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with my apparent inability to finish anything. I bring each sweater to the verge of completion and them move on to the next thing, leaving the previous project dangling just short of ever being done.

Now, it's moved on to an inability to start anything either. I've had the yarn for the Everyday Cardigan for a couple of weeks. You think I'd be champing at the bit to get started. However, instead of racing ahead to the next new thrill, I'm content to keep chugging away at Rain Forest.

I don't even particularly want to buy yarn anymore. I think this could be serious.

I'm in a slump, a funk, a malaise.

I'm experiencing ennui, tedium, boredom.

I am in the doldrums. I am a resident of Dullsville. I am distracted, dizzy, befuddled, fuzzy-brained, discombobulated, muddled, boggled, baffled, frustrated, stymied, confounded, overcome, paralyzed, flustered, rattled, nonplussed.

I'm at my wit's end, out on a limb, in a rut, round the bend, down in the dumps, up the creek, over a barrel, under the weather, through the wringer, behind the eight ball, in a state, out of sorts, off my rocker. Just plain tired.

Spring has sprung, but I'm not yet bouncing back. I need to break out of this mood.

I guess for now I'll just keep going round and round with Rain Forest. I set the steek at the back of the neck last night.

[OK, Ellen. Let me have it].

07:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (13)

April 02, 2004

Wherefore art thou, knit blogger?

I've spent the first four days of this week editing a manuscript at work. When I've come home, I haven't been in the mood for more time either writing or sitting in front of a computer. Hence, no new posts.

Apparently, the sustained mental exertion has steadily drained away my energy reserves because I have been heading to bed a couple of hours earlier every night. Hence, little knitting progress.

[excuses, excuses].

Happily, today was my extra day off and I spent it knitting, napping, and puttering around. I stayed away from the computer and tried to think as little as possible.

Hmm, knitting and not thinking. That sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Ah, but disaster was averted...I think.

I've set the neck steek and begun the neck shaping. Instead of using a stitch holder, I have the extra neck stitches on a piece of scrap yarn.

And although I lose an hour tomorrow night, I still have the entire weekend ahead of me.

05:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)