Thursday, September 3, 2009
Sew Modern?
One of the things that I am struggling to understand is how the innovation of the sewing machine ended up causing the extinction of the guild system. I find this to be ironic. Not to mention utterly absurd. I feel that the guilds had some things moving against them, but that if they treated this invention like the gift it was, they would have been successful. Perhaps they would have even thrived.
Let me ponder the potential reasons why a tailor would refuse to embrace the sewing machine:
1. Pride: Oh deadly sin that causes so much folly! Tailors were the "masters" of their craft. aspiring young ones sought out the teaching of these learned men who knew every aspect of their craft. They were masters, however, of sewing by hand rather than machine. After all, this was how it had been done for years. Hand-stitch was pure, perfect art. How could you sully it with a machine? Well interestingly enough, the machine could create neater stitches than any human being, but then it wouldnt have that hand made feel. and gracious me, you would have far too much extra time on your hands! you might even be able to produce more. gasp! I think that tailors were too concerned with preserving their "craft" rather than their business. which is nice, kinda like a diet, in that its a pretty ideal that would never work in practice. after all , sewing machine + plenty of work > (is greater than) no sewing machine + being outsourced to an inferior entity.
2. Pride: yes its the only reason besides commercial suicide that I can come up with (sorry im not more creative). Being a "sewing" machine that makes that strenuous task more pleasant (hah.), it seems that the sewing machine took on a distinctly feminine vibe. Again, it was pride that would keep a male from embracing this "woman helper". Goodness gracious me. Having a job to put food on your table is infinitely than watching your children starve. Or starving yourself. The market for the wealthy who could afford the quality hand stitched clothing was not big enough for every tailor in Germany. Im sorry, some of them should have gotten off their high horse and learned how to use the sewing machine. Besides, masculinity/femininity is merely a matter of perception. By making it a tool of the male tailors trade rather than a female seamstress, the sewing machine would have become an inherently masculine object.
Tailors had all the tools to save their profession. They already had a market that they were familiar with and customers who were familiar with them. They already knew the ins and outs of trade: what cloth to buy, when to buy it, who to buy from, where to sell...etc... And they had the upper had when it came to quality. An experienced tailor who knew how to produce faster with a sewing machine was going to outsell a housewife trying to earn a little extra. The market became polluted with inferior work made from inferior cloth. (the machines were so expensive to buy and maintain that the women were forced to work nearly 24/7 to make ends meet. not a recipe for good work. they also probably had to buy inferior cloth because it was cheaper). As a result of these things, I have concluded that the tailors made an unfortunate decision in not adapting to the changing world which caused them to become extinct.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMarilin, I have to agree with you that the only reason the Guild system fell was due to pride. The points you made regarding the errors of their ways were pretty accurate as far as I can see. The only thing that would have made the sewing machine be regarded as either masculine or feminine would be their actions towards it when it came to the stage. If tailors had adopted the practice of the sewing machine as a masculine job, it would have not only given the machine a masculine feeling, but it would probably have changed the progression of events almost completely. What’s funny to me is that not we still deal with some workers being angered by the fact that machines are now used to perform a faster and more effective job than they are capable of doing (i.e. factories for car makers, textile mills, etc.). What really brings that to home though is that after all of these years of machine work in factories and the rate at which they can produce, the handmade goods of the world are still purchased. I guess some consumers will always see goods made by hand as a more suitable purchase than those made by industrialized factories.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with some of your points, I think that the collapse of the guild system was less an issue of pride than of competition. As Hausen points out in her article, "...machine sewing as opposed to hand-sewing was essential if [workers] were to earn any more than a bare minimum" (275). In order to compete in the labor market, families and guilds had to break up so that individuals could go to work in factories to make a profit. Those who would have stayed home to sew by hand would have been light years behind even those who didn't work in the factories, but used sewing machines at home.
ReplyDeleteWhile I think that you and David are correct in discussing the impact of (especially masculine) pride, Elizabeth also brings up the subject of competition. Pride was not the only reason that guild memebrs clung to their status and privileges. The purpose of guilds was to exert control over a market and industry. Guilds assured quality, price and quantity. They also ensured that all shoemakers had work by limiting the number of shoemakers in a particular area. Once the guilds lost their ability to control the source of labor, technological innovations like the sewing machine allowed larger numbers of people to enter the trade. Because so many people were competing for work which could now be done faster and by people without skills, the value of that labor went down and with it the price or salary of the laborers. The problem the sewing machine created was that it allowed anyone to make clothing at a much faster rate, destroying the controlled, orderly market place created by the guilds and driving the price of labor so low that men looking to support their families could no longer afford to take such low-paying jobs, hence the rise in desparate female laborers.
ReplyDelete