Because I'm still sick, and people seemed interested, and it's one of my favorite topics. This is more "The History of Fat" than "I'm such a damned idiot". Everyone in the comments had it right, or parts of the story right. When you cobble the whole thing together, it's easy to see why people who eat a Western diet are dropping like flies from 'excess diseases' - heart disease, cancer, etc.
Through most of human history, fat was pretty hard to get. Animals were wild, and only fatty at the very end of summer, if at all - anyone who has ever eaten venison, imagine a steady diet of it. Plus, the bulk of the meat came from smaller game - while we did go out and hunt mammoths and bison and other large animals, it was more easy and more common for squirrel-size critters to wind up in the pot every night. Those, too, are very low in fat. Even when we domesticated animals, until the revolution in animal husbandry that happened in the MIDDLE AGES (like barely a thousand years ago), we really didn't understand how to keep our critters fat and happy all year, so we still wound up with a big late-summer slaughter and skinny animals the rest of the year.
A few OTHER factors to keep in mind: Most meat was dried or smoked for preservation, and while I can't find a good article about it to link to, and you may not believe me, drying reduces the fat content of meat, particularly the unsaturated fats you need more of. Also, if you're out hunting a wooly mammoth, you've got to go out and HUNT IT DOWN, and haul it back to the cave - there's a significant calorie OUTPUT to get the fat in the first place, which leads to much less overall intake than you'd first think. (There is a big deal in anthropology class where you look at calories expended vs. calories brought home, and in many cases, big-game hunting is only beneficial to the small children and nursing mothers who stay home - it's actually a loss or barely break-even for the hunters themselves. It depends a lot on animal, time of year, blah blah, but that's the overall gist of it.)
Oil crops like olives and sunflowers and canola and avocado and peanuts were non-existent for most of our history (particularly in the west - many good oil crops like peanuts and sunflowers were native to the New World, which means Euros have only had them five hundred years). In the case of olives, they were toxic to begin with and had a major domestication job in front of them. (But the fact that we went to the trouble of domesticating them should tell you how desperate we were for fats.) The others were either unknown or grown in very small areas.
All this leads to what anthropologists call the human 'fat tooth'. Like a sweet tooth, but instead of sweets, we crave fats. Back when it was impossible to GET, craving fats was a good thing - it motivated us to go out after the damn mammoths and kept us from starving to death. (It's called protein starvation, and it rarely happens any more in the West, but it used to be a major problem. Without a good bit of protein and a small amout of fat every day, you will eventually drop dead.)
Dairy products were late to the game, a result of the domestication of animals in the neolithic. Before that, it was just too hard to get milk - you gonna go milk a wild cow, which was about twice the size of a modern dairy cow? But of course they're full of fat and other goodies like minerals and amino acids and protein. In a very low-fat diet, dairy products are incredibly good for you. They fill a huge niche in the diet. Nowadays, not so much. So of course when they became available we scarfed up dairy products like there was no tomorrow, and by now, for European-heritage people, it's like a heroin habit that we REALLY need to give up. Or at least cut way back on.
And now, in the West, thanks to our fat tooth (and lack of self control... we do have brains, we don't HAVE to listen to our instincts), we now eat twice to three times the amount of fat that we did in our original, stone-age diet. Pretty depressing, isn't it?
The diet we evolved on is now called the Paleolithic Diet. A short introduction is available here; scroll down to the 'eat none of the following' part. You'll find it depressing and enlightening, all at once (though he says to eat more liver and kidney and I disagree - thanks to modern pesticides and other crap, those organs are unsafe, though they used to be very good for you). And, the coolest thing for me and any other history buffs reading, The Food Timeline. Fascinating stuff.
If I were to completely overhaul my diet and change the way I eat (I don't have the self-control for it), I'd switch over to the Paleolithic Diet. As it is, I settle for cutting back on the 'bad stuff' they list. Which includes, haha, dairy products.
-... -
As for McDonald's, they use up TWENTY FIVE PERCENT of the country's potato crop, and between three and five percent of the entire beef output of the country. That obviously makes them a huge force in FARMING, which most people don't realize. They speak, and farmers listen. Occasionally they use their powers for good - they've asked beef farmers who supply them to phase out antibiotic use on their cattle by 2008, and often where McDonald's goes, the market follows.
Sometimes, it's not so good. McD's insists on Russet Burbank potatos for it's french fries, and it's a really old cloned crop that has no modern resistance to bugs or disease - it costs more in pesticides to grow Russets than you can sell them for. Without the government subsidizing the whole clusterfuck, the farmers would go under. As it is, they've laid waste to huge parts of Idaho with all the pesticides and herbicides. The soil is literally sterilized (that's not good; all those bugs play a role, yanno).
You wanna save the environment? Fuck the snowy owls. Quit eating McDonald's french fries.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Hi. I'm a moron.
This has more to do with my neurosis, obsession, ongoing freaked-outedness, or whatever, with losing weight. To get a legitimate definition would probably take going to a legitimate psychologist, and, no. I refuse to be that insane about the whole topic. Going to a shrink would imply I'm taking the whole thing seriously, and I'm determined to laugh at myself over this whole idiotic mess, if it kills me. Damn it.
Anyway. If this topic has already bored you half to death, I understand. There should be a more reasoned post coming along sometime soon, when the Baby's well and I'm well and the migraine's gone. In the mean time I'm gonna shriek.
So, I've studied botany over the years. I lean toward the agriculture/food end of the subject (hence all these history of food books), so I've picked up quite a lot about nutrition. Mostly it's gory details, like which amino acids are lacking in which legume/grain combination, but I've picked up a solid working knowledge of what nutrients the human body HAS to have, to survive. You know. Protein, fats, vitamins, minerals, yadda yadda.
You would THINK I could apply this to MY OWN STUPID DIET. I've been eating a 1500 calorie a day diet for about six months now (feels like six years), and I had figured, you know, avoid deep-fried stuff and junk foods, and how much bad crap could I reasonably fit into 1500 calories, otherwise?
Apparently, quite a hell of a lot.
In my case, I appear to have a problem with saturated fat. I don't think I could have gotten more saturated fat into 1500 calories a day if I had tried, without resorting to extra-fat deep-fried bacon three meals a day. The dairy product addiction (in particular, butter) plays a huge role. This is all my parent's fault. They're the ones who insisted on raising me in the country, dairy country, and getting me hooked. I'm blaming them.
I've cut my saturated fat (and therefore my overall fat) intake by half to three-quarters per day, starting last Friday.
I appear to have lost two pounds.
I am a fucking moron.
Anyway. If this topic has already bored you half to death, I understand. There should be a more reasoned post coming along sometime soon, when the Baby's well and I'm well and the migraine's gone. In the mean time I'm gonna shriek.
So, I've studied botany over the years. I lean toward the agriculture/food end of the subject (hence all these history of food books), so I've picked up quite a lot about nutrition. Mostly it's gory details, like which amino acids are lacking in which legume/grain combination, but I've picked up a solid working knowledge of what nutrients the human body HAS to have, to survive. You know. Protein, fats, vitamins, minerals, yadda yadda.
You would THINK I could apply this to MY OWN STUPID DIET. I've been eating a 1500 calorie a day diet for about six months now (feels like six years), and I had figured, you know, avoid deep-fried stuff and junk foods, and how much bad crap could I reasonably fit into 1500 calories, otherwise?
Apparently, quite a hell of a lot.
In my case, I appear to have a problem with saturated fat. I don't think I could have gotten more saturated fat into 1500 calories a day if I had tried, without resorting to extra-fat deep-fried bacon three meals a day. The dairy product addiction (in particular, butter) plays a huge role. This is all my parent's fault. They're the ones who insisted on raising me in the country, dairy country, and getting me hooked. I'm blaming them.
I've cut my saturated fat (and therefore my overall fat) intake by half to three-quarters per day, starting last Friday.
I appear to have lost two pounds.
I am a fucking moron.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Where I've been.
I know I still need to do the next Charleston Museum post. (I was there for a curator-led tour of selections from their - apparently - massive clothing collection, with a nod toward dyes and older fabrics. There were knits. I hope to get to it tomorrow.)
Yesterday the Baby turned up with some intestinal bug. Nothing serious (the doctors don't want to see you unless the kid is dehydrated or not eating or drinking, or like that) but her poor little bum got so raw that I've spent the day dealing with screaming fits whenever the bug would hit. Real, baby-in-pain screaming. We don't get a lot of that around here ('cause we've got a happy baby), so I don't cope terribly well at all. (Mostly I hug her and sniffle.)
Anyway, I think the worst of it's over and she's dozing on Dadad (as she calls the husbeast) right now. I've been up since four AM and an emotional wreck, and think I caught the germ. It's been a GOOD day.
...I finished up the second sleeve of Tut Tut last night, and I haven't even had a chance to join it to the body!
Anyway, normal blogging will hopefully resume tomorrow, but if I've got this bug, maybe Thursday. I hope none of you catch this. It's nasty. Stay home and knit for the next couple weeks.
Yesterday the Baby turned up with some intestinal bug. Nothing serious (the doctors don't want to see you unless the kid is dehydrated or not eating or drinking, or like that) but her poor little bum got so raw that I've spent the day dealing with screaming fits whenever the bug would hit. Real, baby-in-pain screaming. We don't get a lot of that around here ('cause we've got a happy baby), so I don't cope terribly well at all. (Mostly I hug her and sniffle.)
Anyway, I think the worst of it's over and she's dozing on Dadad (as she calls the husbeast) right now. I've been up since four AM and an emotional wreck, and think I caught the germ. It's been a GOOD day.
...I finished up the second sleeve of Tut Tut last night, and I haven't even had a chance to join it to the body!
Anyway, normal blogging will hopefully resume tomorrow, but if I've got this bug, maybe Thursday. I hope none of you catch this. It's nasty. Stay home and knit for the next couple weeks.
Monday, August 06, 2007
HELP!
...or as the Baby says these days, "Hep, hep!"
I want to take the knitting to the pub tonight for trivia. Unfortunately, everyone there smokes. So... How hard is it to get cigarette smoke out of knitting? Can I give it a good wash as part of the blocking process, or should I avoid it altogether?
I want to take the knitting to the pub tonight for trivia. Unfortunately, everyone there smokes. So... How hard is it to get cigarette smoke out of knitting? Can I give it a good wash as part of the blocking process, or should I avoid it altogether?
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Reality is a bitch.
And the reality, right now, is that on the two years I left the Christmas knitting until September, I lost my mind. The one year I drove myself crazy, and the other year, one gift wasn't done until February. (You can read up on the last days of the Dale of Norway pullover in the February 2006 archives.) Technically I've got three sweaters to knit this year; both in-laws and the husbeast. But the husbeast is willing to wait until after the holiday, so I really only think of it as three. I also want to do a baby sweater by November. (A Baby Surprise, those are fun and quick and easy, but they still take time.) Not to mention we're talking about a Strikke-Along in October that means knitting an entire sweater for that. Finish one sweater and knit three (four counting the husbeast) more by December 25. Hm. I thought I'd sworn off stupid deadlines.
Honestly, I'm going to do what I want, and if I run a little late on Christmas, the in-laws will wait. They love my knitting. And since my mother-in-law learned to knit, and my father-in-law has WATCHED her, they're both all impressed with me. Heeheehee. Life is good.
What all this means is, I need to finish up the original design I'm working on right now (Tut Tut), so I can start the one I have in mind for my mother-in-law (current working title, Celtic Sage. It's not that original, another percentage-system deal.) Last night I put aside the edging for the Pinwheel (I've got a bad feeling that's going to take forever), and got back to work:
That's the bulk of the decreasing for the bell cuff; after that it's a straight shot up the arm. I can read and chat (yes, I hang out in an on-line chat room) while knitting it, so it should get done pretty quick. Then I'm trying a new-to-me shoulder decreasing system which will require knitting a SECOND sweater at a different size, to make sure the system works... But the pattern will have been test-knit twice, so it's all good. (And likely, the Baby will gain a sweater.)
Apparently, judging from the VK review comments, you all like gray. So fine, I won't complain about it in the future. Much. But I still think they overdid it. Several of you have mentioned you'd like to make one or other of the sweaters but they don't come in your size... if you're serious, e-mail me and we'll see about help on re-working the pattern. Sometimes it's not that hard. I'm still (MONTHS after the summer issue) boggling over the idea that 38 inches/98 cm for the bust being LARGE, and that being the biggest size offered. It's like they're stuck in the 1940s. No, the 1880s. When women still wore corsets.
Anyway, I'm gonna go knit. And try to remember all the details about the museum so I can do THAT post. I got kinda sidetracked when I bought the VK magazine.
Honestly, I'm going to do what I want, and if I run a little late on Christmas, the in-laws will wait. They love my knitting. And since my mother-in-law learned to knit, and my father-in-law has WATCHED her, they're both all impressed with me. Heeheehee. Life is good.
What all this means is, I need to finish up the original design I'm working on right now (Tut Tut), so I can start the one I have in mind for my mother-in-law (current working title, Celtic Sage. It's not that original, another percentage-system deal.) Last night I put aside the edging for the Pinwheel (I've got a bad feeling that's going to take forever), and got back to work:
That's the bulk of the decreasing for the bell cuff; after that it's a straight shot up the arm. I can read and chat (yes, I hang out in an on-line chat room) while knitting it, so it should get done pretty quick. Then I'm trying a new-to-me shoulder decreasing system which will require knitting a SECOND sweater at a different size, to make sure the system works... But the pattern will have been test-knit twice, so it's all good. (And likely, the Baby will gain a sweater.)
Apparently, judging from the VK review comments, you all like gray. So fine, I won't complain about it in the future. Much. But I still think they overdid it. Several of you have mentioned you'd like to make one or other of the sweaters but they don't come in your size... if you're serious, e-mail me and we'll see about help on re-working the pattern. Sometimes it's not that hard. I'm still (MONTHS after the summer issue) boggling over the idea that 38 inches/98 cm for the bust being LARGE, and that being the biggest size offered. It's like they're stuck in the 1940s. No, the 1880s. When women still wore corsets.
Anyway, I'm gonna go knit. And try to remember all the details about the museum so I can do THAT post. I got kinda sidetracked when I bought the VK magazine.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Vogue Knitting 25th Anniversary Issue Part Two
So, the patterns. I refer to them by pattern number in the magazine, not page number. And anything in quotes is from the magazine. Having REALLY looked at this issue, I've decided that not only does the stylist need flogged, but the copy editor should be shot, too. I've been really thinking about it lately, and what frustrates me so much is that Vogue Knitting claims to be all about high fashion and glamour. Which, okay, fine. But why, then, do they produce so much stupid, dumpy crap? It's like they've got multiple personality disorder - they're very Vogue and very glamorous, except for when they don't feel like it. HUH?
SUBLIME SHINE: is the first section. Apparently six designers were invited to produce silver scarves to celebrate the 25th anniversary. 'Cause we aren't tired of the whole silver thing yet. Which is really gray. And we all look like shit in gray. Can't get enough of gray.
1. "A ravishing ruffle wrap, secured over one shoulder via a single arm slit." Very easy, very Vogue, very dorky. If you knit it as a regular scarf, I suppose it would be all right, but I suspect this has been steamed to death to hold it's shape; it's silk and mohair. Further quote from the designer about how great Vogue Knitting is.
2. The actual cover scarf. A silk floral thing from Nicky Epstein, in four shades of gray and white. I think it could be pretty in green and colors - like actual flowers - but the gray thing is, as usual, really unflattering.
3. Fairly elaborate rectangular lace scarf. Knitted with a gray and silver-shot yarn. Trimmed with crochet. Is this Vogue Crochet? Did they change it when I wasn't looking?
4. A fist full of monkey's assholes. (That's the husbeast quote, when he looked at this.) It appears to be an irregular hunk of garter stitch done with grey beaded yarn (metallic FX by Berroco) and then curlicues knit on it with another beaded yarn (lazer FX again by Berroco). I can't imagine making a pattern for this. It looks like random, free-form knitting.
5. Run-of-the-mill embossed (knit/purl patterns like basketweave) scarf knit with GLITTERSPUN in silver. If this is supposed to be Vogue Knitting and all glamorous and elaborate, why are they dressing models in stupid shit? Could they make up their minds, please?
6. Freakazoid collar with a train, knit with really huge silver and white woven ribbon. This thing really is a round collar with a long bit knit off it. I'm not sure what purpose it's supposed to serve.
TEXTURED MESSAGES: "The warp and weft of knit/purl combos connect to take a fabric from flat to 3D fabulous." Warp and weft are WEAVING terms, assholes; knitting doesn't have either one. And for some of these patterns, their idea of fabulous knit/purl patterns seems to be ribbing. The photo shoot takes place in a studio hung with dirty canvas and stacked with boxes. VERY VOGUE. (If they're going to be glamorous, could they BE GLAMOROUS? Is that too much to ask?)
7. Sleeveless, almost knee-length fair-isle sweater vest. Supposedly there is ribbing at the waist for shaping, but the ribbing doesn't hit at the model's waist, doesn't suck in, and is darker than the fabric of the sweater, so it actually makes the waist look bigger. It is worn with a brown dress, grey tights, and knee-high, oversized, brown leather boots.
8. Fairly standard cropped cardigan in some kind of relative to moss and seed stitch. Held together with a leather string instead of buttons.
9. An almost ankle-length brown ribbed dress. It is sleeveless, with a turtleneck, and slits up the thighs almost to hip level. The model is all twisted up, trying to look skinny. Worn with a very odd necklace, and with ANOTHER SKIRT UNDER IT. And big black boots. ???
10. The slouchy cardigan with a belt; a variation of this pattern can be found in every Vogue Knitting ever published. This one is gray (can we get done with the fucking gray?) with cables and a garter-stitch belt. Worn over TWO skirts, including a slashed up blue dress that I am positive was in last year's Winter issue.
11. Brown coat with textured knitting on the front sort of like basket weave. Nice, certainly wearable, but this looks like something my grandma would wear to the grocery store in winter, not something out of the hyper-glamorous VOGUE KNITTING.
12. Mystery sweater. Knit with space-dyed pink and blue yarn, the colors have pooled and zig-zagged over the sweater. There's a big wide collar, and three-quarter length sleeves, and an empire waist that hits too high across the boobs, and odd stripes of ribbing and stockinette that leave horizontal lines and bagginess across the body. NO idea what is going on, but it sure as hell doesn't look glamorous to me. Looks like something I tried to design and got mad and ripped back out again. Or a dust cloth.
13. Sideways knit cabled sweater. Nice. Someone designs at least one sweater like this every winter; personally I'd knit it at a tighter gauge so that the knitting would hold it's shape, and get something less fuzzy.
14. A bucket hat at large gauge. Puhleeze. What's glamorous about this? Or original?
15. Sweater on left in above photo. A sort of kangaroo-pouch thing, whith horizontal stripes on the chest and sleeves, 'cause that big blue pouch and collar won't make the wearer look large enough. Worn over THREE SKIRTS.
16. Sweater on the right in above photo. A fairly standard shawl-collar V-neck pullover. Some kind of puffy texture stitch for interest. I think it's the most wearable sweater in the entire section, but we're back to 'this is glamour?' I'd wear it with khakis and boots, myself. And what in hell's up with the two skirts?
17. Diagonal cable turtle-neck in, oh we love it so, GRAY. Styled with a four-inch-wide toolbelt and a pleated silk skirt. The model has feathers in her hair. THIS IS GLAMOUR?
VK'S TOP TEN HITS: "It's a list 25 years in the making; golden oldies from the VK vault remixed to climb today's fashion charts..." I'm not sure quite what they're trying to say here. These are their ten most popular sweaters? Or that these are their most wearable older sweaters? HuH? Keep in mind, I've been reading VK almost from the beginning, and remember when most of these patterns were issued the first time (in some cases, I still have the original magazines in my office). Mysteriously, there are not photos offered for all of these amazingly great knits. Go figure. Also interesting is the fact that of all their horrendously high-fashion patterns they've produced, these ten popular ones are all very average, blue-collar, jeans-and-tee kinds of things. How very NOT Vogue. Do they learn from this? No.
18. From 1989, a throwback to the days of the giant-sweater-with-tights look. They're calling this a 'bubble sweater' and claiming 'the ultra-oversized still has legs'. No. No it doesn't. This sweater - a rather standard overgrown yoke sweater - manages to make a size eight model look like a size fourteen. Plus it's knit with two strands of mohair yarn held together; I figured out that at today's prices it will cost almost $300 to knit. They should have left it in the archives.
19. From 1990, an inoffensive lace-motif pullover. Unfortunatley they're going with oversized again, so it looks like shit. But if you were to knit one in your size (in a COLOR), you could wear it around without a second look. Most people have one or two of these in their closets already. I'd rework the pattern entirely so it was fitted, myself. But I think I've got one that's almost identical, in a coral color.
20. From 2005, one of the most original patterns VK has ever published. The circle sweater. Annie Modisett is the one who came up with the idea; knit a center-out circle, put in some sleeves, and it morphs into a shawl-collared cardigan. The construction is brilliant, and has been re-worked dozens of time since, including the Pinwheel Jacket I'm knitting right now. Even if you don't like the (rather bland) version they show here, the construction method was revolutionary, and somewhere out in the world is a variation on this that will suit everyone. The original was done in shades of pink, purple, and blue, and much more to my taste.
21. From 1991. An A-line mini-dress that is, essentially, a giant yoke sweater. More gray (gag) but with a little bit of length added (or a lot taken off to make it a sweater), and some color, this might possibly be wearable. Maybe. With pants. And no dorky boots. AND SOME COLOR. ARE WE TIRED OF THE GODDAMN GRAY YET?
22. From 2004, Nicky Epstein's Felted Rose bag. The original, if you remember, was black with green lattice, and red roses around the top. The new one is done in TWO SHADES OF MOTHERFUCKING GRAY lattice and lavender and purple flowers on top. I always liked this bag, but the original would cost $150 to knit, if I remember right. I'm considering doing a version of this IN COLORS, with Brown Sheep Nature Spun. WITH COLOR.
23. From 1986, a cabled hat and pair of gloves. This is glamour? They did the new version in silvery gray. AAAAAAAAH!
24. From 1991, the World pattern. Anyone else remember this, or is my age showing? There was a chart made of the world, and an afghan and a sweater and a couple pillows knit from it. This is it again, but done in shades of green, brown, and gold (thank Bob, no gray). Not terribly glamorous, if you ask me. And if we're going to do complicated intarsia knitting, can we find someone with enough skill to do it properly and not have all kinds of fucked up uneven stitches along the edges? I confess, I do like the new touch of the Compass Rose on the left sleeve.
25. From 1992. This one also lacks a certain... high fashion... if you ask me. It's an overgrown cardigan with dropped shoulders (SO flattering) and cabled trees. Nice enough, but I'd expect to find it in "Cast On", not "Vogue Knitting".
26. From 1998, a fitted, angled-ribbing pullover. Originally in blue, now in black (sigh). This was another original idea at the time, the angling of ribbing to shape a sweater and draw the eye to where it should be (boobs) and away from where it should not (waist). It's tunic length, which is kind of risky for larger-sized women, but I've considered knitting it for myself. I would NOT use the moronic yarnover increases on the sleeves though. Big holes in ribbing? Uh, no.
27. From 1991, a Missoni-style knockoff. This was from the era when people were wearing all kinds of textures and patterns and styles all jumbled up. I remember when the original came out; it was black and white stripes, with red, blue, and green triangles. It reminded me of a brodcast test pattern. The new one is shades of brown with navy blue and dark yellow. It still looks like a mess; it's too much everything. Too much color, too many shapes, too many stripes. And not enough shaping; it's a box with a hood.
A TOUCH OF THE CLASSIC: If this stuff is classic, I am Queen of the May. "Just like the femmes fatales and plucky heroines of eras past, you too can subscribe to the power of cables." WHAT? Someone shoot the copy-editor. Again.
28. A blue pullover with the body knit in four directions, like an old-fashioned afghan square. Kind of neat, if you like big yarnovers right across your boobs. And no shaping.
29. Gold silk cabled gloves. Right. Very durable.
30. The obligatory Norah Gaughan "What the FUCK?" pattern. This one's very similar to the Circle Coat above, but instead of a circle, it's a hexagon. The pattern itself leaves a bit to be desired, on details. But I have a burning desire to knit this. It's a sickness. You'd need a really drapey yarn for this; I'm thinking llama or alpaca blend. Heck, it's supposed to be a coat, right?
31. Green A-line sweater that might look kind of cool if they took the moronic four-inch-wide black patent leather belt off it. And what is up with the gloves that don't match? I think this one has the potential to be cool. With really excellent finishing technique and a full figure.
32. A blue keyhole scarf that should be up for free on Knitty and not in a supposedly glamorous fashion magazine.
33. Elbow-length cape. Nice enough, I suppose, if you go for capes.
34. Interesting construction on this one. The sleeves are knit up all the way across the shoulders, and joined with a twist in the front of the neck. Then the body is knit downward from there. It'd be a lot more visible if the sweater had been knit in a slightly lighter color. And what in FUCK is up with the gigantic belt?
35. Purple sweater vest in that length I hate - you know, the one that hangs down past your ass to gurantee it looks big. This fashion model looks like she's got a big ass with this thing on, and she'd be a size eight, most likely. Ridiculous. Probably a nice enough vest if you cut it off at waist level. But not what I'd call high fashion.
36. This one is utterly insane. A raglan-shaped cable knit that almost hits the model's knees. And she's not wearing it as a dress (I would, why in hell not, if it's that long?) she's got on PANTS with it. Yet another recipe for BIG ASS. No shaping to speak of. And the leopard scarf and gloves just make it look all the more silly. In fact, with the hat added in, there's a certain resemblance to Boy George going on.
WELL RED: "The color of romance plus the romance of lace makes for quite an affair."
37. THIS is what I'm talking about. It's glamorous. Pretty. Wearable. Not sure I'd ever wear it, but then I don't do a lot of high-class stuff. THIS sweater could go to a fancy dinner party with no trouble. Vogue should publish more stuff like this, if they want to cling to their alleged reputation for high fashion.
38. They're calling this a cloak, but what it is, is an oversized scarf with sleeves. I have a big personal problem with patterns that make the knitter look like they screwed something up, when the pattern is executed properly. And this is one of those patterns.
39. Another pattern that has a shot at being high fashion. They're claiming it can be sized by moving the buttons, though, and that's both lazy pattern writing AND total bullshit.
40. Purple lace hoodie/cardi, knit with pure silk. It'd make a very nice addition to an average person's wardrobe, to dress up an otherwise everyday outfit; put this on with khakis and a turtleneck, and you'd look quite dressy. Very nice.
41. Lace overdress. Long sleeves and knee length, but the holes are so large you'd have to wear it over something else. In this case, it's a red satin sheath dress. It could probably be worked up to look quite glamorous, though this version looks very odd, like an afterthought thrown on over the dress.
42. This is probably the most original sweater in the magazine. If you get right up on top of the photo, you can see that it's done with a variation on scribble lace; there are alternate rows of a thicker silk yarn, and a very thin silk/mohair, giving it a sheer quality. The shaping is very nice, with bell sleeves and drape at the waist. The fastening in the front is a little weird and could stand to be fixed. Then I flipped to the back and found that the largest size offered is for a 38 inch/98 cm bust. VOGUE, YOU ASSHOLES!
DESIGNER PANACHE: "Seventh Avenue stars go to great lengths to hit new heights of haute knit." My ass.
43. "Only Twinkle can coax such ladylike luxury out of bulky yarn." Wanna bet? This is a knee-length coat knit in SUPER bulky GRAY yarn. WITH EYELETS. The holes are at least an inch across, all over the coat. WHAT IS THE POINT OF WEARING A COAT WITH HOLES IN IT? No shaping. The sleeves are too short. The collar is a mess. The buttons are the size of hub caps. Can we just make bulky knitting illegal, already?
44. Cardigan. The styling leaves a lot to be desired (the skirt looks as if it was made from someone's basement couch), but if the sleeves were made full length, I think it'd be nice enough.
45. Cabled dress train wreck. The collar is too big, the raglan shoulder decreasing is messed up somehow, or it was sewn together badly... No shaping anywhere, and the sleeves are too long. Horrible. If this is glamour, I don't know what I am, 'cause I usually dress better than this. Oh, and it's by Michael Koors. Big shock.
46. Double-breasted cape. Oh please. Nothing like having big black coat buttons resting on each nipple to make a girl look Very Vogue. It's machine knit, too. Cheater. Yet another Michael Koors design. Can we fire him, yet?
47. Goofy-looking red, gray, and brown stocking cap knit with Tilli Thomas beaded yarns. Probably a hundred bucks to knit this hat. Pah.
48. The disaster of the issue. There's always one sweater that makes people shriek; this is the one. It wasn't bad enough, as-is, so they threw in a zipper and a bunch of fur stripes. There are no words. Other than EEEK!
49. Skirt in alternate panels of black and self-striping pastels. What is a seventh grade home ec project doing in the great and glamorous Vogue Knitting?
50. Koigu coat. I suspect that with a little more care, this could be cool; use fewer colors on the meiters, and something other than black for the joins. Blues with yellow, or something. But all these colors make it look like grandma's afghan.
Anyway, that's it. Fifty patterns. Too bad there weren't more photos, but you get the idea. There actually is knittable and wearable stuff in this issue, but as always there's other crap that makes the head spin.
SUBLIME SHINE: is the first section. Apparently six designers were invited to produce silver scarves to celebrate the 25th anniversary. 'Cause we aren't tired of the whole silver thing yet. Which is really gray. And we all look like shit in gray. Can't get enough of gray.
1. "A ravishing ruffle wrap, secured over one shoulder via a single arm slit." Very easy, very Vogue, very dorky. If you knit it as a regular scarf, I suppose it would be all right, but I suspect this has been steamed to death to hold it's shape; it's silk and mohair. Further quote from the designer about how great Vogue Knitting is.
2. The actual cover scarf. A silk floral thing from Nicky Epstein, in four shades of gray and white. I think it could be pretty in green and colors - like actual flowers - but the gray thing is, as usual, really unflattering.3. Fairly elaborate rectangular lace scarf. Knitted with a gray and silver-shot yarn. Trimmed with crochet. Is this Vogue Crochet? Did they change it when I wasn't looking?
4. A fist full of monkey's assholes. (That's the husbeast quote, when he looked at this.) It appears to be an irregular hunk of garter stitch done with grey beaded yarn (metallic FX by Berroco) and then curlicues knit on it with another beaded yarn (lazer FX again by Berroco). I can't imagine making a pattern for this. It looks like random, free-form knitting.
5. Run-of-the-mill embossed (knit/purl patterns like basketweave) scarf knit with GLITTERSPUN in silver. If this is supposed to be Vogue Knitting and all glamorous and elaborate, why are they dressing models in stupid shit? Could they make up their minds, please?
6. Freakazoid collar with a train, knit with really huge silver and white woven ribbon. This thing really is a round collar with a long bit knit off it. I'm not sure what purpose it's supposed to serve.TEXTURED MESSAGES: "The warp and weft of knit/purl combos connect to take a fabric from flat to 3D fabulous." Warp and weft are WEAVING terms, assholes; knitting doesn't have either one. And for some of these patterns, their idea of fabulous knit/purl patterns seems to be ribbing. The photo shoot takes place in a studio hung with dirty canvas and stacked with boxes. VERY VOGUE. (If they're going to be glamorous, could they BE GLAMOROUS? Is that too much to ask?)
7. Sleeveless, almost knee-length fair-isle sweater vest. Supposedly there is ribbing at the waist for shaping, but the ribbing doesn't hit at the model's waist, doesn't suck in, and is darker than the fabric of the sweater, so it actually makes the waist look bigger. It is worn with a brown dress, grey tights, and knee-high, oversized, brown leather boots.
8. Fairly standard cropped cardigan in some kind of relative to moss and seed stitch. Held together with a leather string instead of buttons.
9. An almost ankle-length brown ribbed dress. It is sleeveless, with a turtleneck, and slits up the thighs almost to hip level. The model is all twisted up, trying to look skinny. Worn with a very odd necklace, and with ANOTHER SKIRT UNDER IT. And big black boots. ???
10. The slouchy cardigan with a belt; a variation of this pattern can be found in every Vogue Knitting ever published. This one is gray (can we get done with the fucking gray?) with cables and a garter-stitch belt. Worn over TWO skirts, including a slashed up blue dress that I am positive was in last year's Winter issue.
11. Brown coat with textured knitting on the front sort of like basket weave. Nice, certainly wearable, but this looks like something my grandma would wear to the grocery store in winter, not something out of the hyper-glamorous VOGUE KNITTING.
12. Mystery sweater. Knit with space-dyed pink and blue yarn, the colors have pooled and zig-zagged over the sweater. There's a big wide collar, and three-quarter length sleeves, and an empire waist that hits too high across the boobs, and odd stripes of ribbing and stockinette that leave horizontal lines and bagginess across the body. NO idea what is going on, but it sure as hell doesn't look glamorous to me. Looks like something I tried to design and got mad and ripped back out again. Or a dust cloth.
13. Sideways knit cabled sweater. Nice. Someone designs at least one sweater like this every winter; personally I'd knit it at a tighter gauge so that the knitting would hold it's shape, and get something less fuzzy.
14. A bucket hat at large gauge. Puhleeze. What's glamorous about this? Or original?
15. Sweater on left in above photo. A sort of kangaroo-pouch thing, whith horizontal stripes on the chest and sleeves, 'cause that big blue pouch and collar won't make the wearer look large enough. Worn over THREE SKIRTS.
16. Sweater on the right in above photo. A fairly standard shawl-collar V-neck pullover. Some kind of puffy texture stitch for interest. I think it's the most wearable sweater in the entire section, but we're back to 'this is glamour?' I'd wear it with khakis and boots, myself. And what in hell's up with the two skirts?
17. Diagonal cable turtle-neck in, oh we love it so, GRAY. Styled with a four-inch-wide toolbelt and a pleated silk skirt. The model has feathers in her hair. THIS IS GLAMOUR?
VK'S TOP TEN HITS: "It's a list 25 years in the making; golden oldies from the VK vault remixed to climb today's fashion charts..." I'm not sure quite what they're trying to say here. These are their ten most popular sweaters? Or that these are their most wearable older sweaters? HuH? Keep in mind, I've been reading VK almost from the beginning, and remember when most of these patterns were issued the first time (in some cases, I still have the original magazines in my office). Mysteriously, there are not photos offered for all of these amazingly great knits. Go figure. Also interesting is the fact that of all their horrendously high-fashion patterns they've produced, these ten popular ones are all very average, blue-collar, jeans-and-tee kinds of things. How very NOT Vogue. Do they learn from this? No.
18. From 1989, a throwback to the days of the giant-sweater-with-tights look. They're calling this a 'bubble sweater' and claiming 'the ultra-oversized still has legs'. No. No it doesn't. This sweater - a rather standard overgrown yoke sweater - manages to make a size eight model look like a size fourteen. Plus it's knit with two strands of mohair yarn held together; I figured out that at today's prices it will cost almost $300 to knit. They should have left it in the archives.
19. From 1990, an inoffensive lace-motif pullover. Unfortunatley they're going with oversized again, so it looks like shit. But if you were to knit one in your size (in a COLOR), you could wear it around without a second look. Most people have one or two of these in their closets already. I'd rework the pattern entirely so it was fitted, myself. But I think I've got one that's almost identical, in a coral color.
20. From 2005, one of the most original patterns VK has ever published. The circle sweater. Annie Modisett is the one who came up with the idea; knit a center-out circle, put in some sleeves, and it morphs into a shawl-collared cardigan. The construction is brilliant, and has been re-worked dozens of time since, including the Pinwheel Jacket I'm knitting right now. Even if you don't like the (rather bland) version they show here, the construction method was revolutionary, and somewhere out in the world is a variation on this that will suit everyone. The original was done in shades of pink, purple, and blue, and much more to my taste.
21. From 1991. An A-line mini-dress that is, essentially, a giant yoke sweater. More gray (gag) but with a little bit of length added (or a lot taken off to make it a sweater), and some color, this might possibly be wearable. Maybe. With pants. And no dorky boots. AND SOME COLOR. ARE WE TIRED OF THE GODDAMN GRAY YET?22. From 2004, Nicky Epstein's Felted Rose bag. The original, if you remember, was black with green lattice, and red roses around the top. The new one is done in TWO SHADES OF MOTHERFUCKING GRAY lattice and lavender and purple flowers on top. I always liked this bag, but the original would cost $150 to knit, if I remember right. I'm considering doing a version of this IN COLORS, with Brown Sheep Nature Spun. WITH COLOR.
23. From 1986, a cabled hat and pair of gloves. This is glamour? They did the new version in silvery gray. AAAAAAAAH!
24. From 1991, the World pattern. Anyone else remember this, or is my age showing? There was a chart made of the world, and an afghan and a sweater and a couple pillows knit from it. This is it again, but done in shades of green, brown, and gold (thank Bob, no gray). Not terribly glamorous, if you ask me. And if we're going to do complicated intarsia knitting, can we find someone with enough skill to do it properly and not have all kinds of fucked up uneven stitches along the edges? I confess, I do like the new touch of the Compass Rose on the left sleeve.
25. From 1992. This one also lacks a certain... high fashion... if you ask me. It's an overgrown cardigan with dropped shoulders (SO flattering) and cabled trees. Nice enough, but I'd expect to find it in "Cast On", not "Vogue Knitting".26. From 1998, a fitted, angled-ribbing pullover. Originally in blue, now in black (sigh). This was another original idea at the time, the angling of ribbing to shape a sweater and draw the eye to where it should be (boobs) and away from where it should not (waist). It's tunic length, which is kind of risky for larger-sized women, but I've considered knitting it for myself. I would NOT use the moronic yarnover increases on the sleeves though. Big holes in ribbing? Uh, no.
27. From 1991, a Missoni-style knockoff. This was from the era when people were wearing all kinds of textures and patterns and styles all jumbled up. I remember when the original came out; it was black and white stripes, with red, blue, and green triangles. It reminded me of a brodcast test pattern. The new one is shades of brown with navy blue and dark yellow. It still looks like a mess; it's too much everything. Too much color, too many shapes, too many stripes. And not enough shaping; it's a box with a hood.
A TOUCH OF THE CLASSIC: If this stuff is classic, I am Queen of the May. "Just like the femmes fatales and plucky heroines of eras past, you too can subscribe to the power of cables." WHAT? Someone shoot the copy-editor. Again.
28. A blue pullover with the body knit in four directions, like an old-fashioned afghan square. Kind of neat, if you like big yarnovers right across your boobs. And no shaping.
29. Gold silk cabled gloves. Right. Very durable.
30. The obligatory Norah Gaughan "What the FUCK?" pattern. This one's very similar to the Circle Coat above, but instead of a circle, it's a hexagon. The pattern itself leaves a bit to be desired, on details. But I have a burning desire to knit this. It's a sickness. You'd need a really drapey yarn for this; I'm thinking llama or alpaca blend. Heck, it's supposed to be a coat, right?
31. Green A-line sweater that might look kind of cool if they took the moronic four-inch-wide black patent leather belt off it. And what is up with the gloves that don't match? I think this one has the potential to be cool. With really excellent finishing technique and a full figure.32. A blue keyhole scarf that should be up for free on Knitty and not in a supposedly glamorous fashion magazine.
33. Elbow-length cape. Nice enough, I suppose, if you go for capes.
34. Interesting construction on this one. The sleeves are knit up all the way across the shoulders, and joined with a twist in the front of the neck. Then the body is knit downward from there. It'd be a lot more visible if the sweater had been knit in a slightly lighter color. And what in FUCK is up with the gigantic belt?
35. Purple sweater vest in that length I hate - you know, the one that hangs down past your ass to gurantee it looks big. This fashion model looks like she's got a big ass with this thing on, and she'd be a size eight, most likely. Ridiculous. Probably a nice enough vest if you cut it off at waist level. But not what I'd call high fashion.
36. This one is utterly insane. A raglan-shaped cable knit that almost hits the model's knees. And she's not wearing it as a dress (I would, why in hell not, if it's that long?) she's got on PANTS with it. Yet another recipe for BIG ASS. No shaping to speak of. And the leopard scarf and gloves just make it look all the more silly. In fact, with the hat added in, there's a certain resemblance to Boy George going on.
WELL RED: "The color of romance plus the romance of lace makes for quite an affair."
37. THIS is what I'm talking about. It's glamorous. Pretty. Wearable. Not sure I'd ever wear it, but then I don't do a lot of high-class stuff. THIS sweater could go to a fancy dinner party with no trouble. Vogue should publish more stuff like this, if they want to cling to their alleged reputation for high fashion.
38. They're calling this a cloak, but what it is, is an oversized scarf with sleeves. I have a big personal problem with patterns that make the knitter look like they screwed something up, when the pattern is executed properly. And this is one of those patterns.
39. Another pattern that has a shot at being high fashion. They're claiming it can be sized by moving the buttons, though, and that's both lazy pattern writing AND total bullshit.40. Purple lace hoodie/cardi, knit with pure silk. It'd make a very nice addition to an average person's wardrobe, to dress up an otherwise everyday outfit; put this on with khakis and a turtleneck, and you'd look quite dressy. Very nice.
41. Lace overdress. Long sleeves and knee length, but the holes are so large you'd have to wear it over something else. In this case, it's a red satin sheath dress. It could probably be worked up to look quite glamorous, though this version looks very odd, like an afterthought thrown on over the dress.
42. This is probably the most original sweater in the magazine. If you get right up on top of the photo, you can see that it's done with a variation on scribble lace; there are alternate rows of a thicker silk yarn, and a very thin silk/mohair, giving it a sheer quality. The shaping is very nice, with bell sleeves and drape at the waist. The fastening in the front is a little weird and could stand to be fixed. Then I flipped to the back and found that the largest size offered is for a 38 inch/98 cm bust. VOGUE, YOU ASSHOLES!
DESIGNER PANACHE: "Seventh Avenue stars go to great lengths to hit new heights of haute knit." My ass.
43. "Only Twinkle can coax such ladylike luxury out of bulky yarn." Wanna bet? This is a knee-length coat knit in SUPER bulky GRAY yarn. WITH EYELETS. The holes are at least an inch across, all over the coat. WHAT IS THE POINT OF WEARING A COAT WITH HOLES IN IT? No shaping. The sleeves are too short. The collar is a mess. The buttons are the size of hub caps. Can we just make bulky knitting illegal, already?
44. Cardigan. The styling leaves a lot to be desired (the skirt looks as if it was made from someone's basement couch), but if the sleeves were made full length, I think it'd be nice enough.45. Cabled dress train wreck. The collar is too big, the raglan shoulder decreasing is messed up somehow, or it was sewn together badly... No shaping anywhere, and the sleeves are too long. Horrible. If this is glamour, I don't know what I am, 'cause I usually dress better than this. Oh, and it's by Michael Koors. Big shock.
46. Double-breasted cape. Oh please. Nothing like having big black coat buttons resting on each nipple to make a girl look Very Vogue. It's machine knit, too. Cheater. Yet another Michael Koors design. Can we fire him, yet?
47. Goofy-looking red, gray, and brown stocking cap knit with Tilli Thomas beaded yarns. Probably a hundred bucks to knit this hat. Pah.
48. The disaster of the issue. There's always one sweater that makes people shriek; this is the one. It wasn't bad enough, as-is, so they threw in a zipper and a bunch of fur stripes. There are no words. Other than EEEK!
49. Skirt in alternate panels of black and self-striping pastels. What is a seventh grade home ec project doing in the great and glamorous Vogue Knitting?
50. Koigu coat. I suspect that with a little more care, this could be cool; use fewer colors on the meiters, and something other than black for the joins. Blues with yellow, or something. But all these colors make it look like grandma's afghan.Anyway, that's it. Fifty patterns. Too bad there weren't more photos, but you get the idea. There actually is knittable and wearable stuff in this issue, but as always there's other crap that makes the head spin.
Vogue Knitting 25th Anniversary Issue Part One
It's that time of year, gang. Time for the fall review of VK. As you can see, I'm going to split this into two parts. Whatever else you can say about Vogue, they really have pulled out all the stops on this issue and there are SIXTY patterns available, if you include the ten cover patterns that are available for free on line. (Click here if you want 'em.) This part of the review will include the articles and the cover shots, and then the NEXT review will cover the actual patterns (all fifty of them!) If you live entirely for the knitwear reviews, there are the cover sweaters on this post, but you'll have to skip ahead for the full review.
As usual, images are from the VK web site, and everything in quotes is from the magazine. All other text is my own. I may break down later and scan the photo of a scarf the husbeast said looked like 'a fistfull of monkey's assholes'. It will depend on how outraged I am by the time I get to the real reviews, and whether the scanner looks friendly today.
Anyway. The magazine.
There are actually eleven covers stacked, one on top of the other, at the front of the magazine. The actual, legit COVER, cover pattern (a scarf by Nicky Epstein) is found back in the regular patterns. But the other ten are not in the magazine, but available free on the web site. The styling on all these is over-the-top. I'm not sure if I should be outraged; it's supposed to be high fashion, and it's freaking Vogue, and it's their anniversary edition, and maybe I'm just a plebian middleclass nobody, but all that silver eyeshadow makes the models look like Vegas hookers.
Pattern one, a big, fuzzy, full-length coat, worn over a very nice sequined dress.
If you need a big fuzzy coat, I suppose this is as good a pattern as any. The gray is probably not the most flattering color, but it's a THEME, damn it. And in all seriousness, having worn beaded clothing before, there'd be a real risk of snagging the sequins on the fuzz and trashing the dress. ...and I'm not sure a big fuzzy coat is up the the glamour.
Pattern two, another grey coat, this one with a cabled lace pattern and pockets really down low where no one can reach them.
I suspect the model is hunched over in that awkward, dorky-looking pose in a desperate attempt to look like she has a waist. And I'm still not sure that grey wool knit coats are up to the glamour of evening gowns, but it's VOGUE, dude!
Pattern three, a partly-sideways knit short cardigan with really clever waist shaping.
This would be really flattering to plus-sizes and ladies who have big bums, though of course, the color is wrong for 90% of the population. (Who looks good in gray? Seriously?) If I were gonna knit one of these sweaters, it would be this one. It always cracks me up when the models look pissed, like this one. Maybe it's the satin turban?
Pattern four, a cape knit with LION BRAND.
This isn't a bad pattern, really, but who the fuck is going to wear it over a satin ball gown with long gloves and a headband??? I can see a kid wearing it to school over jeans and a sweater, sure, but yet again, the glamour thing comes off looking silly. I doubt they set out to make knits look ridiculous, but they accomplished it. Probably not what they should be shooting for, as a seller of knitting patterns. Oy.
Pattern five, a classic knit dress of the variety I call 'overgrown turtleneck'.
The odd, twisty pose probably means that the model thinks she looks fat in the dress. 'Nuff said. The choice of yarn, resulting in horizontal stripes, was pretty stupid, too. But if you're a skinny rail, it probably wouldn't be bad in a solid color.
Pattern six, massively, hugely, ginormously overgrown raglan cableknit.
Because of an utter lack of shaping, I don't think this would be flattering to anyone, not even plus-sizes or pregnant women. The neck is horrifying. No idea what the idea was behind this. Maybe someone wanted a tent with a chimmney?
Pattern seven, stranded-color dress.
As in other photos, the model ties herself into a knot, desperate to look like she has a figure. This kind of thing is what drives me batshit about Vogue. Glamour is all very well, but who is going to knit this and wear it? Seriously? No one. Not even skinny chicks. Because it LOOKS STUPID. Oh, and as for BEING stupid... if you look closely you can see a seam up the side. Stranded color, KNIT FLAT. Who was smoking crack?
Pattern eight, a mystery knit. You can't tell from the photo whether it's a poncho or a sweater.
Looking at the pattern, I've found it's a sweater. Doesn't the model look delighted? How is it that the movement toward fitted knits exists just about everywhere in modern hand-knitting EXCEPT the VK office, which is supposed to be cutting edge? None of these patterns are properly fitted, not even the dresses.
Pattern nine, overgrown shrug coat.
Back to no fitting again. It is what it is; though I think it'd be better in more flattering colors. And worn with jeans and a tee shirt.
Pattern ten, Kaffe Fassett retread with NO FITTING.
Finally, some color. Even if it is on a GIANT SACK. I've never been impressed with Fassett's pattern-making skills, and here's fine evidence of why. This would be flattering to no one. Though of course the flowers are pretty. Is that supposed to be a lotus?
There is a LOT of advertising, of course, much of it containing sweaters as weird as those above.
Letter from the editor, calls the people responsible for the above photo shoot "The Glam Squad". And there's a cute little sentimental photo of a bunch of editors and former editors, all wearing silver (can we get over that yet?).
"Very New, Very Vogue", a section on what's new that's probably more advertising revenue for them. Nothing's really new; silk flowers, pewter stitch markers, beaded yarn. There's a cool photo of a kajillion knitting needles of all different types, labeled.
New yarns. Instead of making puff balls out of them, or other stupidity, this time they actually KNIT SWATCHES. Useful information. I may swoon. (Lots of beaded silk stuff. I imagine it's more advertising.)
The usual jumble of reviews of books and yarn stores.
An article on hairpin lace and how we should still be making it. With directions. First of all, this isn't knitting, and secondly...
Yeah, right.
A new thing they're making a big deal about is the "Sweater Map". They take an oddly constructed sweater from the issue and lay it out and stick labels on it, like 'moss stitch' and 'reverse side of cabled collar'. Nothing earth-shaking, but given the usual bad photography of the knitwear, getting a good look at something is always helpful.
"Fits that Flatter" by Lily Chin is a useful article about choosing construction methods that flatter you. (No squares or dropped shoulders, etc.) It's a beginner level article, but if you really have no idea where to start when it comes to design or choosing a pattern for yourself, it's useful information.
Meg Swansen's article is "25 of her favorite things" which mostly comes down to EZ techniques like jogless stripes and applied I-cord and the Zimmermania blog.
Nicky Epstien does a technique article on how to knit flowers for her cover scarf. With silk. Yeah. Right.
"Vogue Knitting, Cover to Cover" is an article about how an issue gets put together.
The next two articles are the only reason I'm REALLY glad I bought the magazine, and spent the evening, last night, reading them. I think they were worth the money I paid for the magazine.
"Knitting's Old Guard". It's an interview with Kaffe Fassett, Mari Lynn Patrick, Meg Swansen, and Alice Starmore. Yes. They managed to get Alice Starmore involved. Stop the presses. Anyway, they all discuss how things have changed in the last 25 years and what they'd like to see happen next. Interestingly (when compared with the next article), they all seem to remain very committed to on-paper publishing and traditional copyright law. There doesn't seem to be any need to branch out, for them, though I hear Meg's enjoying the Zimmermania Blog (a bunch of fans, me included, post photos of all the EZ-based things they knit). Alice does manage to get in how mean the industry has been to her, and how rude people are about copyright. (Hey, Alice, if you reissued your books, so we could BUY THEM, we would, instead of bootlegging copies.) They were rather down on free patterns and the quality of them, though they remained polite about it.
The next article, really predicably, is titled "Knitting's New Guard." Another interview, this time with Vickie Hohwell, Adina Klein, Shannon Okey, Clara Parkes, and Stephanie Pearl-McPhee. As you can imagine, they were much more community-minded and internet based, and talked about all the ways to make money in the biz other than selling traditional, copyrighted patterns (though of course there's still a market for that too). The different tones of the two interviews was really amazing. Neither was particularly negative, but the younger folks (young? I know Stephanie's my age, or close to it, and the others are around there or older) certainly 'felt' a lot more dynamic.
There's an ad for a company called "Signature Needles" that offers custom-turned aluminum needles, including three kinds of points; stiletto, middy, and blunt. So far they only offer single-points. Double-points are 'coming soon' and no mention at all of circulars. If they ever get it together and do circulars, they're going to be my new favorite needle.
The Fall Forecast is predicably depressing; sloppy, oversized, weirdly shaped knits with no color. Lots of gray, white, and black, with just a tiny bit of blue. Though they might have chosen those colors for this stupid issue theme.
Next up, the patterns!
As usual, images are from the VK web site, and everything in quotes is from the magazine. All other text is my own. I may break down later and scan the photo of a scarf the husbeast said looked like 'a fistfull of monkey's assholes'. It will depend on how outraged I am by the time I get to the real reviews, and whether the scanner looks friendly today.
Anyway. The magazine.
There are actually eleven covers stacked, one on top of the other, at the front of the magazine. The actual, legit COVER, cover pattern (a scarf by Nicky Epstein) is found back in the regular patterns. But the other ten are not in the magazine, but available free on the web site. The styling on all these is over-the-top. I'm not sure if I should be outraged; it's supposed to be high fashion, and it's freaking Vogue, and it's their anniversary edition, and maybe I'm just a plebian middleclass nobody, but all that silver eyeshadow makes the models look like Vegas hookers.
Pattern one, a big, fuzzy, full-length coat, worn over a very nice sequined dress.
If you need a big fuzzy coat, I suppose this is as good a pattern as any. The gray is probably not the most flattering color, but it's a THEME, damn it. And in all seriousness, having worn beaded clothing before, there'd be a real risk of snagging the sequins on the fuzz and trashing the dress. ...and I'm not sure a big fuzzy coat is up the the glamour.
Pattern two, another grey coat, this one with a cabled lace pattern and pockets really down low where no one can reach them.
I suspect the model is hunched over in that awkward, dorky-looking pose in a desperate attempt to look like she has a waist. And I'm still not sure that grey wool knit coats are up to the glamour of evening gowns, but it's VOGUE, dude!
Pattern three, a partly-sideways knit short cardigan with really clever waist shaping.
This would be really flattering to plus-sizes and ladies who have big bums, though of course, the color is wrong for 90% of the population. (Who looks good in gray? Seriously?) If I were gonna knit one of these sweaters, it would be this one. It always cracks me up when the models look pissed, like this one. Maybe it's the satin turban?
Pattern four, a cape knit with LION BRAND.
This isn't a bad pattern, really, but who the fuck is going to wear it over a satin ball gown with long gloves and a headband??? I can see a kid wearing it to school over jeans and a sweater, sure, but yet again, the glamour thing comes off looking silly. I doubt they set out to make knits look ridiculous, but they accomplished it. Probably not what they should be shooting for, as a seller of knitting patterns. Oy.
Pattern five, a classic knit dress of the variety I call 'overgrown turtleneck'.
The odd, twisty pose probably means that the model thinks she looks fat in the dress. 'Nuff said. The choice of yarn, resulting in horizontal stripes, was pretty stupid, too. But if you're a skinny rail, it probably wouldn't be bad in a solid color.
Pattern six, massively, hugely, ginormously overgrown raglan cableknit.
Because of an utter lack of shaping, I don't think this would be flattering to anyone, not even plus-sizes or pregnant women. The neck is horrifying. No idea what the idea was behind this. Maybe someone wanted a tent with a chimmney?
Pattern seven, stranded-color dress.
As in other photos, the model ties herself into a knot, desperate to look like she has a figure. This kind of thing is what drives me batshit about Vogue. Glamour is all very well, but who is going to knit this and wear it? Seriously? No one. Not even skinny chicks. Because it LOOKS STUPID. Oh, and as for BEING stupid... if you look closely you can see a seam up the side. Stranded color, KNIT FLAT. Who was smoking crack?
Pattern eight, a mystery knit. You can't tell from the photo whether it's a poncho or a sweater.
Looking at the pattern, I've found it's a sweater. Doesn't the model look delighted? How is it that the movement toward fitted knits exists just about everywhere in modern hand-knitting EXCEPT the VK office, which is supposed to be cutting edge? None of these patterns are properly fitted, not even the dresses.
Pattern nine, overgrown shrug coat.
Back to no fitting again. It is what it is; though I think it'd be better in more flattering colors. And worn with jeans and a tee shirt.
Pattern ten, Kaffe Fassett retread with NO FITTING.
Finally, some color. Even if it is on a GIANT SACK. I've never been impressed with Fassett's pattern-making skills, and here's fine evidence of why. This would be flattering to no one. Though of course the flowers are pretty. Is that supposed to be a lotus?
There is a LOT of advertising, of course, much of it containing sweaters as weird as those above.
Letter from the editor, calls the people responsible for the above photo shoot "The Glam Squad". And there's a cute little sentimental photo of a bunch of editors and former editors, all wearing silver (can we get over that yet?).
"Very New, Very Vogue", a section on what's new that's probably more advertising revenue for them. Nothing's really new; silk flowers, pewter stitch markers, beaded yarn. There's a cool photo of a kajillion knitting needles of all different types, labeled.
New yarns. Instead of making puff balls out of them, or other stupidity, this time they actually KNIT SWATCHES. Useful information. I may swoon. (Lots of beaded silk stuff. I imagine it's more advertising.)
The usual jumble of reviews of books and yarn stores.
An article on hairpin lace and how we should still be making it. With directions. First of all, this isn't knitting, and secondly...
Yeah, right.
A new thing they're making a big deal about is the "Sweater Map". They take an oddly constructed sweater from the issue and lay it out and stick labels on it, like 'moss stitch' and 'reverse side of cabled collar'. Nothing earth-shaking, but given the usual bad photography of the knitwear, getting a good look at something is always helpful.
"Fits that Flatter" by Lily Chin is a useful article about choosing construction methods that flatter you. (No squares or dropped shoulders, etc.) It's a beginner level article, but if you really have no idea where to start when it comes to design or choosing a pattern for yourself, it's useful information.
Meg Swansen's article is "25 of her favorite things" which mostly comes down to EZ techniques like jogless stripes and applied I-cord and the Zimmermania blog.
Nicky Epstien does a technique article on how to knit flowers for her cover scarf. With silk. Yeah. Right.
"Vogue Knitting, Cover to Cover" is an article about how an issue gets put together.
The next two articles are the only reason I'm REALLY glad I bought the magazine, and spent the evening, last night, reading them. I think they were worth the money I paid for the magazine.
"Knitting's Old Guard". It's an interview with Kaffe Fassett, Mari Lynn Patrick, Meg Swansen, and Alice Starmore. Yes. They managed to get Alice Starmore involved. Stop the presses. Anyway, they all discuss how things have changed in the last 25 years and what they'd like to see happen next. Interestingly (when compared with the next article), they all seem to remain very committed to on-paper publishing and traditional copyright law. There doesn't seem to be any need to branch out, for them, though I hear Meg's enjoying the Zimmermania Blog (a bunch of fans, me included, post photos of all the EZ-based things they knit). Alice does manage to get in how mean the industry has been to her, and how rude people are about copyright. (Hey, Alice, if you reissued your books, so we could BUY THEM, we would, instead of bootlegging copies.) They were rather down on free patterns and the quality of them, though they remained polite about it.
The next article, really predicably, is titled "Knitting's New Guard." Another interview, this time with Vickie Hohwell, Adina Klein, Shannon Okey, Clara Parkes, and Stephanie Pearl-McPhee. As you can imagine, they were much more community-minded and internet based, and talked about all the ways to make money in the biz other than selling traditional, copyrighted patterns (though of course there's still a market for that too). The different tones of the two interviews was really amazing. Neither was particularly negative, but the younger folks (young? I know Stephanie's my age, or close to it, and the others are around there or older) certainly 'felt' a lot more dynamic.
There's an ad for a company called "Signature Needles" that offers custom-turned aluminum needles, including three kinds of points; stiletto, middy, and blunt. So far they only offer single-points. Double-points are 'coming soon' and no mention at all of circulars. If they ever get it together and do circulars, they're going to be my new favorite needle.
The Fall Forecast is predicably depressing; sloppy, oversized, weirdly shaped knits with no color. Lots of gray, white, and black, with just a tiny bit of blue. Though they might have chosen those colors for this stupid issue theme.
Next up, the patterns!
Friday, August 03, 2007
Remember the trivia team?
If not, I'm part of a group of the husbeast's co-workers (Navy men one and all) who play trivia at a pub on Monday nights. I had thought this was entirely a win-free-beer kind of thing, but apparently not; we're an official team with a national organization who does trivia games all over.
We're in a tournament.
The single guys on the team have been playing almost every night at various bars and pubs in Charleston, N Charleston, and Summerville. They're joined by the married guys (and often the married guys' kids) whenever the married guys can get away. I'm the only wife playing that I know of.
At any rate, the head of the team (who might possibly be taking this a little more seriously than is healthy, but I'm the woman with a closet full of yarn, so I'm in no position to judge) is hell-bent on getting into the regional playoffs. If, against all odds, we win, we get two thousand dollars. In real money, not pub coupons.
So, with this in mind, the husbeast went off last night to play trivia with the team, while I stayed home with the Baby. Last night's game, they got fifteen points. A perfect score, with all questions answered right, is about eighty points. When I play on Mondays, the scores are usually in the seventies, sometimes in the sixties. It was suggested to the husbeast - by HIS co-workers - that next Thursday, HE should stay home with the Baby and I should go play trivia.
I believe the word 'assface' was used.
We're in a tournament.
The single guys on the team have been playing almost every night at various bars and pubs in Charleston, N Charleston, and Summerville. They're joined by the married guys (and often the married guys' kids) whenever the married guys can get away. I'm the only wife playing that I know of.
At any rate, the head of the team (who might possibly be taking this a little more seriously than is healthy, but I'm the woman with a closet full of yarn, so I'm in no position to judge) is hell-bent on getting into the regional playoffs. If, against all odds, we win, we get two thousand dollars. In real money, not pub coupons.
So, with this in mind, the husbeast went off last night to play trivia with the team, while I stayed home with the Baby. Last night's game, they got fifteen points. A perfect score, with all questions answered right, is about eighty points. When I play on Mondays, the scores are usually in the seventies, sometimes in the sixties. It was suggested to the husbeast - by HIS co-workers - that next Thursday, HE should stay home with the Baby and I should go play trivia.
I believe the word 'assface' was used.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
The Charleston Muesum.
There's been an exhibit at the Charleston Museum since May that I've been trying to get to. I didn't want to take the Baby along, so I had to wait until an evening where the husbeast was home and I didn't feel like death and wasn't working out, and blah blah blah. Today was the day.
I walked into the place, and right inside the door was a small exhibit of glass and ceramics.
Everything from Ming Dynasty to Spode to some glass from Tiffany. Happy day.
Apparently the museum here is the oldest one in the country. And like many small, old, regional museums, it's a place where generations of 'important' (read 'rich') local folks have emptied their closets and attics. Which can make for a fun jumble of artifacts in the place, but they usually feel kind of schizophrenic. The Charleston Museum is doing better than most at focusing on local history... but then they've had since 1774 (before the country was founded) to put together their collection.
Most of the upstairs is devoted to a collection on the local history. I figured that since the local history involved a lot of cotton and indigo (see photo of antique cotton bale at left), there would be a lot of fun textile stuff. I was right.
There were a couple cute little sewing kits, of fabulous workmanship and probably significant resale value.
There was also a nice pile of knitting needles, and some lasts for baby shoes, and that little book in the front was of knitting patterns, from the 1800s. (I didn't recognize the name of the author - a guy - from Victorian Lace Today.)
There was something labeled a sewing basket that made me want to shriek:
There were two things I am nearly positive were miser's purses.
They were knitted of what looked an awful lot like silk (and they were from the 1800s, so the unfaded bright color also leans toward the silk idea), and had two silver rings on them, each. If they weren't miser's purses, I don't want to know what they were. (There was also a miser's purse in another exhibit, but I think I forgot to take a photo of it. Oops. Sorry, Alwen.)
And there was some amazing crocheted lace, done with thin sewing thread.
Down in what I thought of as the 'jumble sale' section of the museum, I found a "Polynesian textile"
which was probably aquired on someone's cruise around the world in the 1930's and after it sat on the back of their couch for 50 years, their great-grandkids donated it to the museum. (I always cook up all kinds of fun stories for how these things wound up in museums I visit. "It was dug up in the midden by college students" ruins my whole day.)
So there you go. Textiles at the museum.
Tomorrow, I'll show photos of what I was actually there for. But here's a hint.
I walked into the place, and right inside the door was a small exhibit of glass and ceramics.
Everything from Ming Dynasty to Spode to some glass from Tiffany. Happy day.
Apparently the museum here is the oldest one in the country. And like many small, old, regional museums, it's a place where generations of 'important' (read 'rich') local folks have emptied their closets and attics. Which can make for a fun jumble of artifacts in the place, but they usually feel kind of schizophrenic. The Charleston Museum is doing better than most at focusing on local history... but then they've had since 1774 (before the country was founded) to put together their collection.
Most of the upstairs is devoted to a collection on the local history. I figured that since the local history involved a lot of cotton and indigo (see photo of antique cotton bale at left), there would be a lot of fun textile stuff. I was right.There were a couple cute little sewing kits, of fabulous workmanship and probably significant resale value.
There was also a nice pile of knitting needles, and some lasts for baby shoes, and that little book in the front was of knitting patterns, from the 1800s. (I didn't recognize the name of the author - a guy - from Victorian Lace Today.)
There was something labeled a sewing basket that made me want to shriek:
There were two things I am nearly positive were miser's purses.
They were knitted of what looked an awful lot like silk (and they were from the 1800s, so the unfaded bright color also leans toward the silk idea), and had two silver rings on them, each. If they weren't miser's purses, I don't want to know what they were. (There was also a miser's purse in another exhibit, but I think I forgot to take a photo of it. Oops. Sorry, Alwen.)
And there was some amazing crocheted lace, done with thin sewing thread.
Down in what I thought of as the 'jumble sale' section of the museum, I found a "Polynesian textile"
which was probably aquired on someone's cruise around the world in the 1930's and after it sat on the back of their couch for 50 years, their great-grandkids donated it to the museum. (I always cook up all kinds of fun stories for how these things wound up in museums I visit. "It was dug up in the midden by college students" ruins my whole day.)
So there you go. Textiles at the museum.
Tomorrow, I'll show photos of what I was actually there for. But here's a hint.
Sekhmet, you dumbass.
She has free run of the house and can sleep literally anywhere she wants (except my yarn closet). So where does she decide to take a nap?
Annoyed, and pleased, and annoyed again.
All in 24 hours.
So last night I did my two-month weigh-in and measure at the gym. I've lost ten inches from various parts of my body; two inches off my boobs, waist, butt, etc. Yay. Very nice. And my body-fat percentage has dropped. But get this. I HAVE GAINED A POUND. The woman who owns and runs the place was doing my weigh-in and agreed that yes, that was strange. (I'm on a 1500 calorie a day diet.) She was very nice and printed out a list of all the times I've been to the gym, and my weight and measurement at my weigh-ins.
Because I had a doctor's appointment this morning.
They sent me to a PA (physician's assistant) instead of a doctor, because they thought I was just there for a perscription refill. Which is why I'm usually there, and the guy was competent and concerned, so it works for me. (I'll ask for him when I go back for more refills- he's got a clue.) Once I explained my weight-gain concerns with him, he ALSO agreed it was weird, and sent me off to the lab for blood tests (mostly thyroid) and told me to schedule a gallbladder ultra-sound. As is normal in these situations, we start by ruling out the simple stuff (or finding out it's the problem) before moving on to the more complicated or weird stuff. He offered to grab a doctor for me to talk to, but really at this stage it's standard procedure and I liked him, so I told him not to bother. (However, depending on how things go, I will be demanding an edocrinologist. If I need one.) He also offered to send me a nutritionist, but after talking to me about my eating habits, he agreed there probably wasn't much a nutritionist could do for me. (All those classes in agriculture and botany actually cover nutrition, too - just from a different angle.)
Then, he very politely said "Uh... how often are you taking these Lortabs?" because I have doubled the amount I take - I used to go four months between refills and now it's two. It wasn't a "Do you need detox?" tone, he just wanted to know what was going on medically, and also because any responsible medical person SHOULD know why someone's taking narcotics, and how often. When I explained about the gym, he immediately understood and that was the end of it. No justifications, no arguments about how I'm in pain. Just "I've been taking them a lot more because I'm working out." and he replied, "Oh, of course."
I'm mildly weirded out by going to someone a generation younger than I am for medical care. He's competent, he's nice, he's caring, he's got his act together, and he looks like he's not old enough to vote. Much like my OB/GYN whom I reallly like. But it weirds me out.
I think, against the odds, I've landed another decent medical person to deal with. This is now four in a row, that the military has assigned me, who turned out to be competent, caring people. I shudder to think what the future will bring. My next assigned medical care provider will turn out to be Dolores Umbridge incarnate. (That's a Harry Potter refrence for you non-fans. REALLY nasty woman.)
It still took me forty minutes to get the damn narcotics out of the pharmacy. Those assholes.
But here's a picture of the husbeast and The Baby to brighten your day. (At least, it brightens mine.)
So last night I did my two-month weigh-in and measure at the gym. I've lost ten inches from various parts of my body; two inches off my boobs, waist, butt, etc. Yay. Very nice. And my body-fat percentage has dropped. But get this. I HAVE GAINED A POUND. The woman who owns and runs the place was doing my weigh-in and agreed that yes, that was strange. (I'm on a 1500 calorie a day diet.) She was very nice and printed out a list of all the times I've been to the gym, and my weight and measurement at my weigh-ins.
Because I had a doctor's appointment this morning.
They sent me to a PA (physician's assistant) instead of a doctor, because they thought I was just there for a perscription refill. Which is why I'm usually there, and the guy was competent and concerned, so it works for me. (I'll ask for him when I go back for more refills- he's got a clue.) Once I explained my weight-gain concerns with him, he ALSO agreed it was weird, and sent me off to the lab for blood tests (mostly thyroid) and told me to schedule a gallbladder ultra-sound. As is normal in these situations, we start by ruling out the simple stuff (or finding out it's the problem) before moving on to the more complicated or weird stuff. He offered to grab a doctor for me to talk to, but really at this stage it's standard procedure and I liked him, so I told him not to bother. (However, depending on how things go, I will be demanding an edocrinologist. If I need one.) He also offered to send me a nutritionist, but after talking to me about my eating habits, he agreed there probably wasn't much a nutritionist could do for me. (All those classes in agriculture and botany actually cover nutrition, too - just from a different angle.)
Then, he very politely said "Uh... how often are you taking these Lortabs?" because I have doubled the amount I take - I used to go four months between refills and now it's two. It wasn't a "Do you need detox?" tone, he just wanted to know what was going on medically, and also because any responsible medical person SHOULD know why someone's taking narcotics, and how often. When I explained about the gym, he immediately understood and that was the end of it. No justifications, no arguments about how I'm in pain. Just "I've been taking them a lot more because I'm working out." and he replied, "Oh, of course."
I'm mildly weirded out by going to someone a generation younger than I am for medical care. He's competent, he's nice, he's caring, he's got his act together, and he looks like he's not old enough to vote. Much like my OB/GYN whom I reallly like. But it weirds me out.
I think, against the odds, I've landed another decent medical person to deal with. This is now four in a row, that the military has assigned me, who turned out to be competent, caring people. I shudder to think what the future will bring. My next assigned medical care provider will turn out to be Dolores Umbridge incarnate. (That's a Harry Potter refrence for you non-fans. REALLY nasty woman.)
It still took me forty minutes to get the damn narcotics out of the pharmacy. Those assholes.
But here's a picture of the husbeast and The Baby to brighten your day. (At least, it brightens mine.)
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
One-fourth done.
With the Pinwheel Jacket border.
As you can see, the edge I chose appears to have a natural curve to it anyway - all to the good. I need forty repeats, and that's ten. I can't help but think of all the thousands of hand-knit bedspreads made over the centuries, all with knit-on borders like this, only there'd be something like a hundred or two hundred repeats, instead of forty. It makes me whine a little less. Just a little.
I'm thinking a couple more pattern repeats, and then back to Tut, Tut. This stuff is exactly why I keep two patterns going at once; no boredom. Or at least, very little. Right now I've got the ideal combination - Tut Tut is zombie knitting I can do while reading a book, but the Pinwheel edge I have to pay attention to every minute. So I can do either intense or easy knitting depending on my mood. (I try to do exactly this combination at all times, but by reading my blog archives you can see I rarely pull it off this neatly.)
There was a question in the comments a while back (sorry I took so long to get to it) about how much yarn was needed to knit a blanket. All I can say is, find a similar pattern in a similar size and gauge, and see how much it calls for. OR, you can knit up one ball of the yarn you intend to use, figure out how much area it covers (square feet or square centimeters), and work with that to guess how much yarn you need. Then buy some extra, just in case. If there's a knit-on edge like the Pinwheel Jacket, the edge will use more yarn than you can possibly imagine; the entire body of the Pinwheel took about six balls of yarn. The edge is taking eight.
Apparently there is a new Vogue Knitting on the newsstands. Something about a 25th anniversary edition. I plan to go in search of it tonight, after I hit the gym. Brace yourselves for a review, coming soon.
As you can see, the edge I chose appears to have a natural curve to it anyway - all to the good. I need forty repeats, and that's ten. I can't help but think of all the thousands of hand-knit bedspreads made over the centuries, all with knit-on borders like this, only there'd be something like a hundred or two hundred repeats, instead of forty. It makes me whine a little less. Just a little.
I'm thinking a couple more pattern repeats, and then back to Tut, Tut. This stuff is exactly why I keep two patterns going at once; no boredom. Or at least, very little. Right now I've got the ideal combination - Tut Tut is zombie knitting I can do while reading a book, but the Pinwheel edge I have to pay attention to every minute. So I can do either intense or easy knitting depending on my mood. (I try to do exactly this combination at all times, but by reading my blog archives you can see I rarely pull it off this neatly.)
There was a question in the comments a while back (sorry I took so long to get to it) about how much yarn was needed to knit a blanket. All I can say is, find a similar pattern in a similar size and gauge, and see how much it calls for. OR, you can knit up one ball of the yarn you intend to use, figure out how much area it covers (square feet or square centimeters), and work with that to guess how much yarn you need. Then buy some extra, just in case. If there's a knit-on edge like the Pinwheel Jacket, the edge will use more yarn than you can possibly imagine; the entire body of the Pinwheel took about six balls of yarn. The edge is taking eight.
Apparently there is a new Vogue Knitting on the newsstands. Something about a 25th anniversary edition. I plan to go in search of it tonight, after I hit the gym. Brace yourselves for a review, coming soon.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
AAAAAAAHHHHH!
ATTACK OF THE ONE-ARMED SWEATER!
Jumper. Whatever.
In typical fashion, now that I've joined on the arm, I'm starting to think the body is too short. And since this is ribbing, I can't just pull out the cast-on and knit downward, I'd have to knit extra length and graft it on to the bottom. Which I've done in the past, and hated. I've got a bad feeling I'll wind up doing it again.
But for now I'm going to go work on Pinwheel. I want that stupid lace edge finished.
Jumper. Whatever.
In typical fashion, now that I've joined on the arm, I'm starting to think the body is too short. And since this is ribbing, I can't just pull out the cast-on and knit downward, I'd have to knit extra length and graft it on to the bottom. Which I've done in the past, and hated. I've got a bad feeling I'll wind up doing it again.
But for now I'm going to go work on Pinwheel. I want that stupid lace edge finished.
Monday, July 30, 2007
The Baby, and the sleeve. And maybe the cat.
The Baby is maturing rapidly, kind of like a fine wine or a good wheel of cheese. We can see differences every day now, usually different words she has learned. Yesterday, she found an old sun hat I had tossed into her toy basket, handed it to the husbeast, and said quite clearly, "Hat." I assume that she caught the word the day before when we'd put her own hat on her, outside, but you never know. The cat might have taught her. So far, she knows one color (blue), and one number (two). She uses them for everything. I am so amazed that she recognizes numbers (she will put her finger on any number in a book or on the ruler I use when I knit, and say 'two!') that I don't bother correcting her. I just agree, right, it's a number. Good for you.
In the jumble of about twenty often-useless words she knows ('wow' and 'cool'), she's also picked up "book". I gave her a new one the other day, and she carried it with her all afternoon, telling everyone "Book!" and paging through it over and over, even when we were changing her diaper.
As the husbeast put it, "Definitely your kid."
-... -
The sleeve continues. I'm quite enjoying a round (or ninety) of nearly mindless knitting.
You can see where the cuff bells out a bit; I wanted something graceful without worrying too much about what I'd drag the sleeve through. I think I got the right balance of length and practicality. Unfortunately the cast-on is all weird and ruffly, so as usual I'm going to pick it out and put in a different edge.
I've decided to go back to my original plan for the year, which was to keep two sweaters going at all times; one an original and one from a pattern (or adapted from a pattern). That way I can produce some new patterns without completely losing my mind. It also covers the Christmas knitting; I'm doing one original (I think) and one adaptation. Maybe. Probably. Unless I change my mind. Which never happens, right?
-... -
With the Baby more mobile and vocal than ever before, the cat has, to put it lightly, freaked out. And guess who her security blanket is? Of course. Me. The one she bites. (Some day I'd LOVE an explanation of cat psychology; I suspect it has a lot to do with feeling superior and abusing those that love you most.)
Most days are spent with her face mashed against my foot, desperately trying to ignore the Baby while she sleeps. Nights are spent with free run of the house, flinging kitty litter all over the floor and scratching the shit out of her scratching post and killing giant cockroaches that she leaves in the middle of the kitchen for me to find, while half awake, the next morning (often by stepping on them barefoot). It's the first time since I adopted Sekhmet that she's been noctournal. Normally she sleeps at night with me, and spends the days awake, running through the house.
Poor kitty. I wish I could nap like that.
In the jumble of about twenty often-useless words she knows ('wow' and 'cool'), she's also picked up "book". I gave her a new one the other day, and she carried it with her all afternoon, telling everyone "Book!" and paging through it over and over, even when we were changing her diaper.
As the husbeast put it, "Definitely your kid."
-... -
The sleeve continues. I'm quite enjoying a round (or ninety) of nearly mindless knitting.
You can see where the cuff bells out a bit; I wanted something graceful without worrying too much about what I'd drag the sleeve through. I think I got the right balance of length and practicality. Unfortunately the cast-on is all weird and ruffly, so as usual I'm going to pick it out and put in a different edge.
I've decided to go back to my original plan for the year, which was to keep two sweaters going at all times; one an original and one from a pattern (or adapted from a pattern). That way I can produce some new patterns without completely losing my mind. It also covers the Christmas knitting; I'm doing one original (I think) and one adaptation. Maybe. Probably. Unless I change my mind. Which never happens, right?
-... -
With the Baby more mobile and vocal than ever before, the cat has, to put it lightly, freaked out. And guess who her security blanket is? Of course. Me. The one she bites. (Some day I'd LOVE an explanation of cat psychology; I suspect it has a lot to do with feeling superior and abusing those that love you most.)
Most days are spent with her face mashed against my foot, desperately trying to ignore the Baby while she sleeps. Nights are spent with free run of the house, flinging kitty litter all over the floor and scratching the shit out of her scratching post and killing giant cockroaches that she leaves in the middle of the kitchen for me to find, while half awake, the next morning (often by stepping on them barefoot). It's the first time since I adopted Sekhmet that she's been noctournal. Normally she sleeps at night with me, and spends the days awake, running through the house.
Poor kitty. I wish I could nap like that.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Military acronyms.
There's nothing to blog here (I'm still sick and I'm still knitting a sleeve) and everyone had such fun with FNG, that I thought I'd list some more. This is, of course, the unofficial version. None of that legitimate CINCPACFLEET stuff here. (That stands for Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet.)
FUBAR is the most common, standing for Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition
SNAFU is related, Situation Normal, All Fucked Up, as is
JANFU, Joint Army-Navy Fuck Up
FNG, Fucking New Guy
TLAR, pronounced tea-lar - last syllable rhymes with bar, That Looks About Right (handy in knitting) related to
SWAG, Scientific Wild-Ass Guess
REMF, Rear Eschelon Mother Fucker
BOHICA, Bend Over, Here It Comes Again
DILLIGAF, Do I Look Like I Give A Fuck
The husbeast and I can't think of any more. But I probably will as soon as I hit 'publish'. TLAR really will come in handy for all us knitters. And there aren't even any swear words in it.
FUBAR is the most common, standing for Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition
SNAFU is related, Situation Normal, All Fucked Up, as is
JANFU, Joint Army-Navy Fuck Up
FNG, Fucking New Guy
TLAR, pronounced tea-lar - last syllable rhymes with bar, That Looks About Right (handy in knitting) related to
SWAG, Scientific Wild-Ass Guess
REMF, Rear Eschelon Mother Fucker
BOHICA, Bend Over, Here It Comes Again
DILLIGAF, Do I Look Like I Give A Fuck
The husbeast and I can't think of any more. But I probably will as soon as I hit 'publish'. TLAR really will come in handy for all us knitters. And there aren't even any swear words in it.
Sekhmet, you fucker.
That's me, sitting on the edge of my office chair while the cat refuses to move.
Oh, sure, you can say it's my fault for not moving her, but you don't know this cat.
Oh, sure, you can say it's my fault for not moving her, but you don't know this cat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
