 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Redefining Berlin Work in America, 1840–1865 Thanks to the funding provided by the Decorative Arts Trust, Nicole Belolan, a Winterthur Fellow, researched Ann Warder’s personal papers at Haverford College, the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, and other locations. She also visited institutions such as Historic New England, the Peabody Essex Museum, the Museum for Early Southern Decorative Arts, and the Linden Hall School for Girls Archives to help contextualize and interpret Warder’s Berlin work pattern collection and thus gain a better understanding of Berlin work as a nineteenth-century phenomenon.
On July 23, 1856, Mary Chapin Warder sent a letter from Brattleboro, Vermont, to Ann Warder, her sister-in-law in Philadelphia, asking if Ann would send her “a slipper pattern to embroider.” Mary goes on to explain that “I thought among your paper patterns you might have one you would let me take for a while…I cannot get anything here that will do at all. And I am tired of working my old ones. I want to work a pair for Mr. Darling.”(note 1) Mary’s letter represents a friendly correspondence among relatives and the long tradition of stitching needlework gifts. It also represents one of Berlin work’s distinguishing characteristics—the international dissemination of patterns on point or graph paper—and the immense popularity Berlin work enjoyed in the nineteenth century. Ann Warder’s (1824–1866) collection of Berlin work patterns and her personal documents allow a glimpse into mid-nineteenth century Berlin work culture in America, a poorly understood topic among scholars and collectors alike. Berlin wool work, which reached its height in popularity in American in the mid-1800s, is a type of wool embroidery on canvas most often executed in cross or tent stitch. Berlin work objects range in form from slippers to large framed Biblical scenes. The creation of nineteenth-century Berlin wool work was facilitated by the international printing and selling of pictorial needlework designs on point or graph paper. For my thesis, one collection of Berlin work patterns and some stitched objects saved by Warder will serve as a case study with which to interpret Berlin work objects at other institutions, nineteenth-century needlework handbooks, newspaper references to Berlin work, and other print culture to help recreate the nineteenth-century Berlin work discourse involving objects, texts, and ideas (Figure 1).
Ann Warder, a sickly but financially comfortable Quaker woman who lived in Philadelphia for her entire life, collected and saved dozens of Berlin work patterns.(note 2) Warder’s collection of paper designs indicates that for Warder, patterns were worth saving, reinforcing with a woven fabric, and labeling with her name and the date (Figure 2). Pattern preservation efforts similar to Warder’s were practiced by students attending Linden Hall Seminary in Lititz, Pennsylvania, and Salem Academy in Salem, North Carolina. Both Linden Hall and Salem students reinforced most of their patterns with poster board. Salem also framed many of its patterns with woven tape or wallpaper remnants. Thus, it may be concluded that those who engaged in Berlin work preserved patterns for future use.
Although Warder’s collection includes few finished objects, it does contain several samples of Berlin work on canvas. (note 3) Most of Warder’s samples are worked on Penelope canvas, or canvas that includes colored stripes and whose warps and wefts are “drawn in a slight degree two and two together, so that none but a very silly person could make a mistake (Figure 3).”( note 4) Many Berlin work patterns—especially those printed in Germany—were published on graph paper that mimicked this canvas. It is likely that Warder and her contemporaries used worsted wool for their work, although the precise wool variety is difficult to determine since fiber names were not standardized (Figure 4). (note 5)
How Warder learned to execute Berlin work is unknown, but a rich nineteenth-century Berlin work print culture suggests possibilities. (note 6) Many handbooks, such as Florence Hartley’s The Ladies’ Hand Book of Fancy and Ornamental Work (Philadelphia, 1859) and patterns published in popular women’s magazines such as Peterson’s, provide instruction for executing Berlin work. If Ann and her contemporaries were not self-taught using available needlework manuals, they may have learned from educational institutions such as Linden Hall Seminary, Salem Academy, or other formal modes of instruction.(note 7) Most schools charged an extra ten dollar fee for lessons in worsted work or other “ornamental” branches. Needlework handbooks and institutionalized Berlin work instruction elevated this needlework to an “ART,” but mid-nineteenth-century newspapers and other print sources published writings that exhibited an obvious disdain for Berlin work.(note 8) Warder was well aware of such sentiments. Copied by Warder in 1842, “The Husband’s Complaint” starts as such: “I hate the name of German wool in all its colors bright,/Of chairs and stools in fancy work, I hate the very sight/The shawls and slippers, that I’ve seen, the ottomans & bags,/Sooner than wear a stitch on me I’d walk the streets in rags.” (note 9) Despite such protestations, Berlin work collections I studied at institutions such as Historic New England, The Peabody Essex Museum, the Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts, and others, suggest that Berlin work’s popularity overshadowed its critics (Figure 5).
Thanks to the funding provided by the Decorative Arts Trust, I have developed a more sophisticated understanding of Berlin work. In completing my thesis, I am looking forward to providing a better informed definition of Berlin work and how it reflects nineteenth-century design aesthetics and daily life. Nicole would like to thank the Decorative Arts Trust for its support and encouragement. Her thesis research is ongoing, and she welcomes email inquires and comments about Berlin work: nbelolan@gmail.com. Notes: 2 Warder was born into a successful mercantile family. According to the 1860 census, Warder’s real estate was worth $15,000, and her personal estate was worth $10,000. U.S. Census Bureau, Pennsylvania Census, 1860, Ancestry Library Edition, University of Delaware Library. 3 Winterthur’s Warder Collection of Berlin work patterns and samples was also accessioned with a family prayer book adorned with a canvas work cover, a needle book, and a chatelaine. Each of these objects will be interpreted in my thesis. 4 Mrs. Newton Crosland, The Little Berlin-Wool Worker, or, Cousin Caroline’s Visit (London: William S. Orr, 1844), 11. 5 In fact, “worsted work” was used as often as or more often than “Berlin work” to name this genre of needlework. Thus, “worsted work” may be a more accurate name than “Berlin work.” 6 Warder’s mother was a teacher at Westtown, a Quaker school, but records do not reveal what she taught. 7 To date, no record of Ann’s having attended school has been found. She was sick for most of her life, and this extended illness may explain why she did not attend school. 8 In the introduction to Berlin Wool Work for Ladies (1843), the author expresses hope that her book will serve as a means by which to “elevate that branch [Berlin work] of female accomplishments into an ART.” Similarly, other handbooks emphasize a connection between Berlin work and medieval tapestry weaving to prove Berlin work’s importance and legitimacy. 9 See also “The Exculpation (In answer to the Husband’s Complaint in the Matter of His Wife’s Worsted work),” which follows “The Husband’s Complaint” in Ann’s notebook. Dozens of similar sentiments can be found in nineteenth-century newspapers. “The Husband’s Complaint,” Copied by Ann Warder, 5 August 1842, in Poetry Notebook, ca. 1841–1844, 12-14, Box 105: Ann Warder (1824–1866); Poetry, poetry notebooks, account book of Ann Warder, Collection 1172: Jones-Cadbury Family Papers, ca. 1770-1994, Haverford College Library.
|
||||||||||||||
