3D printable recycled textiles : material innovation and a …/media/worktribe/output-992046/... · The research team’s project, which utilises waste from the Scottish textile industry

VETTESE

©2017TheAuthors.PublishedbyLoughboroughUniversity.ThisisanopenaccessarticleundertheCCBY-NClicense(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

1

3Dprintablerecycledtextiles:materialinnovationandaresurrectionoftheforgotten‘shoddy’industry

DrSamanthaVettese1

1. EdinburghNapierUniversity

ThisitemwassubmittedtotheproceedingsoftheLoughboroughUniversityTextileDesignResearchGroupINTERSECTIONSConference2017byDrSamanthaVetteseCitation:Vettese,S.(2017)3Dprintablerecycledtextiles:materialinnovationandaresurrectionoftheforgotten‘shoddy’industry.InProceedingsofIntersections:CollaborationsinTextileDesignResearchConference,13September2017,LoughboroughUniversityLondon,U.K.Availablefromwww.lboro.ac.uk/textile-research/intersections.AdditionalInformation:Publisher:LoughboroughUniversity(©TheAuthors)Rights:ThisworkismadeavailableaccordingtotheconditionsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0International(CCBY-NC4.0)licence.Fulldetailsofthislicenceareavailableat:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/PLEASECITETHEPUBLISHEDVERSION.

VETTESE


2

This paper will disseminate an interdisciplinary project, undertaken at Edinburgh Napier UniversitybetweentheDesignandAdvancedMaterials.Several3Dprintablematerialsarecommerciallyavailablethat use recycledmaterial, but none that incorporate textiles. This projectwas fundedby the TextilesFutureForumincollaborationwithfourScottishtextilecompanieswhoprovided‘waste’textiles(wool,cashmere and leather), to be used in this way. In the cases of the wool and cashmere, this ispredominantly selvedgewaste from the looms and knittingmachines. The leather was recycled fromairplane seats. The paper will outline the historical context of the project, particularly the advent of‘shoddy’,howthesehistoricalprocesseshavecommoncharacteristicswith theproceduresused in thisproject, a brief outline of how the 3D printable materials were created and an evaluation of theembodimentofthenarrativeofScottishtraditionand‘authenticity’inthematerials.

Keywords:3DPrinting;Waste;Shoddy;Authenticity;ScottishHeritageIntroductionSustainability,biodegradability and circularity are important issues in the textile and fashion industry,withfewtangiblesolutionsthathavethepotentialtomakeanenvironmental impact.(Fletcher,2013)Theresearchteam’sproject,whichutiliseswastefromtheScottishtextileindustryand,incombinationwith PLA bioplastic, created a 3D printable filament that has the ability to bemass produced in thefuture. The process of 3D printing, thematerials used and the availability of 3D printed objects areincreasing and, many believe that digital rapid prototyping has the ability to revolutionise how wemanufactureandconsume.(Gershenfeld,2008)Inthisway,thewastetextilesusedinthisprojectcanbe utilised in bulk and are not down-cycled, particularly if the filaments and 3D printed objects arebranded and identified with the same luxurious ‘craft’ narrative as the textile brands that theyoriginatedfrom.Utilisingwastewool, in particular, into a democratically available product is not a new concept. The‘shoddy’industryinBritainandAmericainthe19thandearlytwentiethcenturyandthen,tothispresentday,inPratoinItaly,exploitedwastewooltocreatea‘new’textile.InBritainandAmerica,thistextilewas always known to be inferior and ‘inauthentic’. Harris Tweed, as a brand was developed in aparticular way that actively shunned the use of shoddy fibres and promoted the authenticity of itsScottish provenance. In Prato in Northern Italy, shoddy was produced and sold quite covertly untilrecentlywhenithasstartedtobeactivelysoldasasustainablematerial.The development of 3D printable material utilising specific Scottish textile waste, in many ways,replicatestheprocessesofshoddyproduction.However,thisprocessandoutputhastheability,inthecurrent climate, not only to expound its sustainable credentials, impart the story of the authenticity,provenance and heritage of Scottish textiles but also to develop both of these aspects in away thatreflectstherevolutionarychangesthatdigitalcraftandmaterialscienceoffer.Inacuriousreversal,theprocesses,materialsandperceptionofshoddyareupturnedinthisproject,wheretheuseofwasteandclarityontheprovenanceoftheoriginalsourcesaddstothebrandimage,perceived‘luxuriousness’andauthenticityofthe3Dprintedmaterialsandpotentialproducts.

VETTESE


3

While the process of shoddy did not immediately inspire this project, many of the processes andconcepts are unexpectedly similar and some of the earlymachinery involved in its production couldhavebeenused,ifavailable.Withlaboratoryconditions,thescrapmaterialswerenotdangerousfortheResearchAssistanttoworkwith,astheyhadbeeninthe19thcenturyshoddyindustry.‘Waste’materialsweremixed with biodegradable ‘virgin’ PLA, a material known for its sustainable and biodegradablecredentials(althoughpotentiallythiscouldhaveworkedwithrecycledPLA).This paperwill give a historical contextualisation of this project, look at themeaning of authenticity,provenanceandluxuryinthisinstanceandoutlinetherelationshipbetweenthisinformationandwhathappenedinthelabsandwiththeindustrialpartners.Thepaperwillconcludewithadiscussiononhowthis3DprintablematerialrelatedtoideasontheheritageofScottishtextilesandperceptionsofit.Whatisshoddy?Shoddywas,andis,awooltextilespuntogetherfromtheshreddedfibresofrecycledwool.(Figure1.)Priortotheindustrialrevolution,whenmanyoftheprocessesinvolvedinthespinningandweavingofclothtookplaceinthehome,leftoverwoolenmaterialswouldhavebeenkepttohandandthenusedasgardenfertilizer.Asthevolumeoftextilewasteincreasedexponentiallywiththegrowthoffactoriesandmanufacture, its distribution across the landscape shifted. Textile waste built up in urban factorysettings. Every key stage in the production process including scouring, carding, spinning andweavingwouldcreatesomewastepotentiallyavailableforreuse.Inadditiontothis,anabundanceofdiscardedcloth,atatimeofhighdemandforwoolengoodsduringtheperiodoftheNapoleonicWars,createdanenvironmentwellsuitedtothedevelopmentofthetextilerecyclingindustry.Shoddy’s advent in the early nineteenth century in England as both a textile product and industrialprocess was made possible by the pre-existing infrastructure of the conventional wool and paperindustries and the development of specially purposed machinery for sorting, grinding, scouring andbalingofrecycledandwastewool.ThedevelopmentoftheprocessofshoddymanufactureisprimarilyattributedtothemillownerBenjaminLaw,inBatley,WestYorkshire,withthefirstshoddyclothbeingdated1813.Shell’s research (2014 :279)said that ‘itoccurredtoLawthat tornwoolenragscouldbefurthershredandthenre-spunintoakindof‘renaissance’yarnwhichcouldbewovenintoanewtypeoffabric:amoreeconomicalincarnationofwool.’Inadditiontothis,Law’sbrotherinlaw,BenParr,iscreditedwith‘inventing’ashreddingmachineryfortextiles–twocylinderswithmetalcombliketeethwhichtearuptheragswherethe‘swifts’meet.Threedifferentkindsofwoolwastecouldbeturnedintothisnewrawmaterial;scouringrefuse,tailors’offcutsandbalesofshreddedoldwoolrags.Machinesforcardingnewwoolcouldbeslightlyadaptedtoprocessoldsoftrags,collectedinitiallyfromtheregionandthenthroughoutEngland,Scotland,Ireland,andEurope.Anemergentsystemofsalvagetechnologycouldcollectragsandsortthemintocolours.Shoddywaspredominantlyusedforgoodsforthe‘workingclasses’includingblankets.Fewexamplesof19thcenturyshoddygarmentsexist,perhapsreflectingthepoorlongevityoftheclothing,butliteraturesuggests that itwasused for simplymademale suitsand,mostoften,armyuniforms. (Figure2.)Thepolitical demonization of shoddy in the 19th century in America is directly related to poor qualityuniformsmadefor theAmericanCivilWar.Confederatesoldierswereknownas ‘raggedrebels’partlybasedontheinconsistenciesandwornthroughstateoftheiruniforms.WarcontractstoJewishtailoring

VETTESE


4

companies suchasBrooksBrothers associatedbadlymade shoddyuniformswithprofiteering and, atthistime,antiSemiticracism.(Bunker&Appel,1994)ThedemonizationofshoddyasaprocessandmaterialAswithmuchofthetextileindustryinBritainduringtheIndustrialRevolution,theconditionsinvolvedinthe production of shoddy were dreadful. (Foster, 2003) In addition to this, the ‘sharp teeth’ in thegrindingmachinesandthedust-likequalityoftheground,oftendirtytextilesaddedtothisreputation.Themachinesbecameknownas‘devils’andgroundtextileswere‘devil’sdust’.(Figure3.)AccordingtoShell(2014:279),thistermwasthoughttohavebeenfirstpublicallycoinedin1842byWilliamFerrand,anMP representing a substantial region ofWest Yorkshire in the House of Commons. He said, ‘theprocesswhichisadoptedbycertainmanufacturers,ofbuyingupalltheoldragstheycanobtain,whichare torn intopiecesbyamachine, thusconverted intoakindofdust,andare thenmixedwithwool,which is eventually manufactured into cloth. This dust, from its nauseous nature, and from itsengendering numerous diseases, has been christened by the manufacturers and workpeople ofYorkshirethe ‘Devil’sdust’. In1861,theauthorofapiececalled ‘Devil’sDust’published inChamber’sJournalofPopular Literature,ScienceandArts,describedhis impressionof themachinery saying ‘theprincipal part of the rag-wool machine is the swift, a frame provided with ten or twelve thousandvicious-lookingteeth,andthatrotatessixorsevenhundredtimesaminute.Notmerelytorn,itisalmostground.’ (Shell 2014 : 380) In the United States, during the American CivilWar, shoddy acquired itsnegativeadjectivemeaninginthepopularconsciousnessbasedonitsassociationwithwarprofiteeringandfearofthepossibilityofdiseasebeingspreadthroughthedirtyrags.(Shell,2014)In Engel’s ‘The Condition of theWorking Class in England’ (1892 : 79 - 80), he talks at length on theinhumanityoftheconditionsinthetextilefactoriesinYorkshire,buthisdislikeofshoddyhadmoretodowithitsbadquality.Hesaid,‘andifaworkingmanbuyshimselfawoolencoatforSunday,hemustget it fromoneofthecheapshopswherehefindsbad,so-called‘Devils-dust’cloth,manufacturedforsaleandnotforuse,andliabletotearorgrowthreadbareinafortnight.’Towardstheendofthe19thCentury, the manufacture of shoddy had, therefore, become synonymous with nightmarishly badworkingconditions (withDevil’s teethanddust), the spreadofdisease,dishonest freeenterpriseandthematerialitselfbecamesymbolofclassdivision.PerceptionsofauthenticityandshoddyShoddy was linked to the deceitful nature of the shoddy magnates but also became known as adeceptive, inauthentic material. Shell said, (2014 : 381) ‘shoddy seemed to have no respect forboundariesmakingithardtotellthepurefromthesubstitute,thederivativefromthefraudulent.’In the second half of the nineteenth century, as ‘fashionable’ clothing becamemore available to thelowerandworkingclasses, through theadventof syntheticdyes,machineprintedcalicosandshoddy(Vettese&Christie,2013),itbecamehardertodifferentiatebetweengarmentsthatwereexpensiveandnot. Thiswasnot only felt to bedeceptive, in termsof coveringup contaminated cloth and allowingcorrupt profiteering, but, from a middle and upper class point of view, made it harder for them todistinguish themselves by way of refinement and taste. The ability of the ‘workers’ to afford newgarments thatwere similar in visual appearance to thoseworn by the higher classes, including theiremployers,begantopervadesociety.Aletterinawomen’smagazinefrom1876said,‘thecookIhave

VETTESE


5

hadfornearlytwoyears,andIhavegotonverywellwithheruntilthelastfewmonths.Bydegreesshehasbeengettinggayerinherdressoflate,andlastSundaywhenshestartedoffforchurch,sheworeablacksilkmadeexactlylikethenewoneIhadsenthomeinthebeginningofwinter,andanewbonnetwhichIamcertainIsawinMadameLouise’swindowinRegentStreetmarked25s’.(Crane,2012:170).LikeEngels,CarlylewascriticalofthewholeindustryoftextilesinEnglandbuthisparticularwritingsonshoddyfocusonthisinauthenticaspectofit.Hesaid,‘understand,ifyouwillconsiderit,thatnogoodmandid, or ever should, encourage ‘cheapness’ at the ruinous expense of unfitness,which is alwaysinfidelity,andisdishonorabletoaman.UniversalshoddyandDevil’sdustcunninglyvarnishedover;thatiswhat youwill findpresented toyou inall placesasware invitingly cheap, if yourexperience is likemine.’(Carlyle,1867:12-13)At the start of the twentieth century, wool growers launchedwide-spread anti-shoddy campaigns inboththeUnitedStatesandBritain.Thesuffusionofuniformsavailable forshreddingafterWorldWarOne increased panic in the wool industry. From this, the new term ‘virgin wool’ was introduced todescribe‘not-shoddy’.Shell’sresearchsaid,‘aslabelingactsbegantorequirespecificationofvirginvsshoddymaterial components, new synonyms for the latter emerged – ‘adulterated’, ‘reworked’ and‘renaissancewool’amongthem.Bythelastfewdecadesofthetwentiethcenturyshoddy-as-nounwasadesignationalmostuniversallyforgotten,exceptinplaceslikeWestYorkshire.’PositiveattributesofshoddyIn the early days of shoddy production, the more alchemic aspects of shoddy production wereappreciated. Shells’s research (2014 : 383) cited The Westminster Review’s essay on Yorkshire,describingBatleyas‘thetatter-metropolis’andsaid‘ofmotheatencoats,frowsyjackets,reechylinen,effusivecottonandoldworstedstockings–thisisthelastdestination.Reducedtofilamentandagreasypulp,bymightytoothcylinders,themuchvexedfabricsre-enter life inthemostbrilliantforms’. Jubb(1860:20)alsosaid,‘totheuninitiated,itmustbesurprisingtoseetheragssuddenlytransformedintofibrouswool;anditisinthisprocessofgrindingthattheapparentimpossibilityofmakingoldragsintonewclothvanishesaway.’Healsowentontosay, ‘notasinglethingbelongingtotheragandshoddysystemisvalueless,oruseless,therearenoaccumulationsofmountainsofdebristotakeuproomordisfigurethelandscape;all–good,badandindifferent–passon,andarebeneficiallyappropriated.’Shell’sresearch(214,388)describesthe‘humankindofjob’involvedinbeingaragsortersaying,‘thegoalwas to, in as short order as possible, place them into ‘grades’ by colour, fabric quality, state ofdisrepair and so on. Touch, smell, actions such as rubbing a cloth against itself by pinching betweenthumbandforefinger–thesewereallthekindsofgesturesthathelpedthesorterworkefficiently,andtheshoddyindustrytomaximiseispotential.Thesorterwasakindofmaterialclassificationspecialist.Aconstantdealingwithnoveltylentitselftotheenactmentofakindofnaturalhistoryclassificationbuiltlargelyoutoftacitknowledge.’ThehistoryofshoddyproductioninPratoBytheendofthenineteenthcenturythecentreofmanufacturingforrecycledwoolhadmovedtoPratoin Italy. According to Hamilton and Fels’s research, after the Second World War, several factorscontributed to the reestablishment of Prato as the wool regeneration centre - demand for warm

VETTESE


6

clothing,scarceavailabilityoffuelforhomeheating,fewplentifulsourcesofvirginwoolandthearrivalin Italyofbalesofdonated clothes fromAmerica. Thepilesofusedgarmentswere sortedby colour,turned intofibreafterbeingsoaked inanoilandchemicalmixturetosoftenthewoolandreducethestaticelectricity.Thefibrewasthenspun,dyedandwovenintocloth.Thesetasksrequiredlabour,butnonewasreadilyavailableinthisregionapartfromthe‘peasantsinthecountryside’who ‘migrated’ to Prato. It is thought that this type ofworkforce and the ‘orrù’ familialsystemof industrialorganisationallowedPrato to thriveproducing, to thepresentday, shoddy fabricusing many of the same techniques as was used in Batley in the 19th century, with better workingconditions.According toRussell& Ireland, (2016) ‘Italian fabricmakersare turningadirty secret intomarketingweapon.Woolproducers inthecityofPratohave longusedscrapstoproducefabricmorecheaply.Once taboo, thepracticemaynowattract aneco-friendly clientele, saving the industry fromtoughChinesecompetition.Pratohasdug theskeletonoutof its closetand turned it intoapowerfulmarketingweapon.’

Pratohasproducedaparticularproduct thatbuildson the ‘hidden’ shoddy industry that hasdeveloped there. The Cardato Recycled brand, which involves many of the factories and businesseswithin Prato, sell its product on ‘ being produced in the Prato district; beingmadewith at least 65%recycledmaterial(clothingortextilescraps)andhavingmeasuredtheenvironmentalimpactofitsentireproductioncycletakingintoaccountthreeaspects:water,energyandCO2consumptionlevels.(Figure4.) To carry the label, products must be produced in Prato, produced with at least 70% of recycledmaterial (recycled clothing or textile off-cuts) be made by mills that have accounted for their CO2emissions and have purchased emission credits from the Prato Chamber of Commerce. The creditspurchasedmustcorrespondtoproductionvolume.Certificatesareissuedtoindividuallotsofproducts,in order to allow businesses to eliminate only the emissions of the textiles that they eventually sell.Twenty-twothousandtonsof‘rags’thathavebeenproducedwiththeCardatotechniquearerecycledinPratoeveryyear.Cardatoproductionischaracterisedbytheuseofshortandheterogeneouspiecesofyarnthataremixedtogethertocreatevarioustextilecombinations’.(Cardato,2017)

ShoddyinScotlandScotland’s textile industry, on the other hand, has developed its distinctive ‘Made in Scotland’ and‘HarrisTweed’brandingstrategyasadirectresultof thepotentialofshoddytodisrupt itsdevelopingindustry.HarrisTweedisoldonitsprovenanceandhandmadenature,whichwasindirectcontradictionto the industrialized shoddy industry. Although, at one point, recycled wool could have becomeintegrated intoHarrisTweedproductionmethodsand ‘hidden’,as inPrato,thisdidnothappenandamore expensive, localizedmethod was used andmaintained.Moisley (1961 : 353) said, ‘this quality[HarrisTweed]hasbeenachieved,and ismaintainedby theuseofselectedrawmaterialsandby themaintenanceofhighstandardsofdesignandcraftsmanship.Inparticular,theScottishindustrydependson virginwool and shoddy and other remanufacturedwools, used extensively inWest Yorkshire, arescarcelyrecognised.’

VETTESE


7

ThehistoryofthedevelopmentofHarrisTweedandthewaythat ithasbeenbrandedhasdevelopedovertheyears.InMoisley’sresearch,hesaidthatinterestinthe‘authenticity’oftheproductstartedintheearlytwentiethcenturyandthattherewasagrowingrecognitionoftheparticularvalueoftweed‘forcountry’useandanincreasingfashionforhandicraftproducts–areactionagainsttheuniformityofmachine-made goods. (Moisley, 1961 : 355) ‘Great play was still made in advertising, of cottagecraftsmanshipandtheHebrideanenvironment’.(Moisley,1961:361)By1934,thedefinitionof‘HarrisTweed’waseasedtopermitthestampingofanycloth‘madeinpurevirginwool,producedinScotland,spun,dyedandfinishedintheOuterHebridesandhandwovenbytheIslandersat theirownhomes in the IslandsofLewis,Harris,Uist,Barraand their severalpurtenancesandallknownastheOuterHebrides.Itwasfurtheraddedthat‘WoveninHarris’,‘WoveninLewis’etccouldbeaddedandalso ‘Hand-spun’ in thecaseof tweedsmadeentirely fromhand-spunyarns.Therenewed Harris Tweed Association embarked on a world-wide advertising campaign and a period ofrapidexpansionandgreatprosperityensued,particularly forLewismill-spun tweed. (Moisley ,1961 :361-362)WastetextilesincontemporaryBritainIntheauthor’sdiscussionswiththeScottishindustrialpartnersforthisproject,whowereallinterestedin therecyclingof their ‘waste’ textiles (in thiscaseprimarilyselvedgewaste from loomsandknittingmachines),noneof themhadheardof the shoddy industryorwereawareofdevelopments inPrato.Theywereallinterestedintheproductionofnewtextilesfromtheirwaste,and,inonecase,thepartnersoughttofind(andsubsequentlybought)amachinethatwouldshredmaterialsintheexactlythesameway that shoddy was produced. One partner specifically asked if a new yarn could be made usingrecycledwool.Severalofthepartnersinthisprojectpaytohavetheirselvedgewastetakenawayandonelookedintousingitasburnablefuel.Inadditiontothis,severalsmallcompanies,primarilyinvolvedwith ‘handicrafts’, sell Scottish selvedgewaste as a knittingmaterial alongwith speciallymade, largeneedles. (Figure 5.) Harris Tweed are known to have issues with their waste being retrieved andrepresented in inferior ‘craft goods’ without their license, discussed in a Textiles Future Forumpresentation.Contemporary West Yorkshire’s recycling industry has outlived the production of shoddy cloth. Thesame machinery is used to shred the recycled textiles but it is now used for ‘carpets, mattresses,speakersystemsandautomotivepadding’.(Shell,2014)Abriefoutlineoftheprocessesinvolvedinthecreationof3DprintabletextilesForthepurposesofthispiece,elementarytimelinesandprocessesthathappenedintheAdvancedMaterialLabsatEdinburghNapierUniversitywillbesummerisedanddepictedratherthanadetailedquantitativedisseminationoftheresults.TheprojectcameaboutthroughaseriesofshortpresentationsbyacademicsandrepresentativesfromtheScottishtextileindustry,ineventsputtogetherbytheTextilesFutureForum.Thisfundingbody‘[invited]proposalsforprojectsfromthetextilesindustrythatwillprovideinnovativeandcommercialbenefittotheScottishEconomyandbeyond’.Thepartnerswhodecidedtobeinvolvedintheprojectsawtheauthorspresenttheirworkon3DprintingandthepreviousprojectutilisingpowderedcellulosefromLenzing.Furthermeetingswere

VETTESE


8

takenwithmanagingdirectorsofthecompanies.TheTextilesFutureForummatchfundedtheinkindsupportfromthetextilecompanieswhichconsistedoftheirtimeandoffcutsoftheirtextiles.Theresearchteamweregiven‘bags’oftextile‘waste’fromfourScottishtextilecompanies–mixedfibreselvedge fromCalzeat,purewool selvedgeand scraps fromBute, cashmere scraps fromBeggandCoandshreddedrecycledleatherfromtheScottishLeatherGroup.Theinitialplanhadbeento‘powder’allthesematerialsbeforetheprocesswouldbeginandtheteamsearched,withverylittlesuccess,forequipmentthatwas,inessence,a‘devil’.Theteamhadpreviouslyusedpowderedmaterialbeforeandwesought toreplicate its successes.Througha fortuitous,casualconversationwith another academic, an old ‘pulveriser’ from the 1970swas discovered tucked awaybehindanotherpieceofequipmentinthelabs.Thiscouldproducearoundonekilogramofpowderanhour.Intheend,theprocessdidnotrequire‘devils’dust’rather,itwasfoundbytheResearchAssistantthat whole pieces of textile and yarn could be used. (Figure 6.) Using a process that the ResearchAssistanthadexploredbefore (creatinga3Dprintablematerial usingpowdered celluloseand flexiblePLA),thewool,cashmereandleatherpieceswerelaminatedbetweensheetsofPLA,turnedintopelletsthenextrudedintoafilament.PLAwaschosenfor itssustainablecredentialsandthat it isknownasaversatile,successfulmaterialfor3Dprinting.Twotypesoffilamentwereproduced;oneusingaflexiblePLAandanother ‘regular’. The secondproduceda filament that gave abetter print.However, itwasfoundthataveryinterestingmaterialwasproducedwiththeflexiblePLAthat,whenitdidnothavetobe 3D printed, made a ribbon shape that could then be laser cut. (Figure 7.) Experiments wereundertakenwiththetemperaturethatthefilamentcouldbeprintedat.Someoftheearlyprintsburnedand smelled unpleasant. (Figure 8.) At this time, using budget from the funded project, the jewellerKathy Vones is creating a range of 3D printed jewellery utilising the regular filament. Sarah Taylor isexperimentingwiththese,towardsawovenpieceincorporatingfibreoptics.(Figure9.)Severalprojects,with the industrial partners are developing including using ‘waste from the waste’ textiles with aselvedge yarn company, 3D printable ‘soft’ textiles, 3D printed textile Scottish ‘souvenirs’ and sheetmaterialusingtheformulafromthisproject.Theresearchteamarealsointheprocessofpatentingthematerial.Theembodimentofauthenticityandheritageina3Dprintablematerial?The3Dprintablematerialcreatedinthisprojectsharesmanyofthesameattributesasshoddybut,aswithCardato,with contemporary attitudes to recycling and sustainability,whatwas concealed in theprocessesandmaterialcomponentscannowbeabrandingstrategy.Theprovenanceandnarrativebehind theScottishwaste textiles canpotentiallybecomepartof theiridentification.‘Thenarrativebehindaproduct,itsauthenticityandprovenance,arekeydriversinluxurytextile brands with the perception of quality of utmost importance. Long standing companies haveinterwoven provenance with their spiritual birthplaces, people and environments which can beleveragedinproductintroductionsandbranding.’(CollinsandWeiss,2015:1030)Provenancereferstothesourceoforiginorbirthplaceofaproduct.Itdelineateshistoryofownership,providingcontextualevidence as to its authenticity. InThe Luxury Strategy,Kapferer (2012) noted at the luxury level thatconsumers are purchasing a ‘product steeped in a culture or in a country’. Geographic origins andprovenance of items are historically entangled establishing connections to a place. (Pike, 2009)Theselocal rootsanchorabrandto itshistory,culture,geographyandancestors, increasingperceivedvalue

VETTESE


9

and are integral to brand identity.’(Collins and Weiss, 2015 : 1031) Products may contain naturalingredientsor timehonoured traditions inmaterialityorproductionmethods thatare intrinsic to theplace.(CollinsandWeiss,2015:1033)Theremaybelinkstohistoricstylesaswellassubjectiveelementscreatedby localculture,employeesorconsumers.Marketeerscontinuetocultivatemythsabout localproducts. ‘They develop sincere stories, which consist of a creative blend of public avowal of handcrafted techniques, relationship to place anduniqueness’. (Iverson andHem, 2008) Theworkforceofselected companies includes artisans and craftspeople, as well as generations of family within thecompaniesstudied.Kapferer(2012)notedthatartisanalmanufacturingis‘anintegralpartofthedream;someonewhoknowstheproductwell,whobelongstothesameculturaluniverse’.Authenticityofproductsalsohasadifferentcontemporarymeaningthanwhen‘inauthentic’shoddyhiditsoriginsandtrueidentityfromthebuyers.Boorstin(1961)andMacCannel(1973)suggestthatobjectauthenticitycanbedeterminedbytestingorassessing itaccordingtocertainstandards.Productsandprocesses are usually described as authentic or inauthentic depending onwhether they aremade orperformedbylocalsaccordingtotheirtraditions.Incontrasttothehistoricperceptionsofshoddyanddespitebeingmadefromwaste,the3Dprintablematerial can still be described as ‘luxurious’ using particular definitions. Kapferer and Bastien (2009)specified that ‘luxury is theexpressionofa taste,ofacreative identity,of the intrinsicpassionof thecreator’. Traditional luxury relies on authenticity focused on craftsmanship, heritage, materials andrarity. (Collins and Weiss, 2015 : 1033) In Kettley’s research, the positive definition of ‘craft’, oftenappliedtotheluxurytextilemarket,alsoappliesinthiscontext.Shesaid‘craftisnolongerbeingdefinedsimplisticallyashandmadegoods,norareassumptionsbeingmadeabouttheculturalstatusoftheC-wordinrelationtoDesignortoart.(Kettley,2017)ThecontemporaryformofCraftoffersapromisingmodel for the development of tangible computational products that seek to be metaphoricallymeaningful as well as useful, and as one of the earliest interactive art forms, offers us a uniqueopportunitytoshapeournewtechnologies. Itallowsustorethinkthenatureofmaterial itselfandtoexplorethevalueswewishtoembedinouremergingcommunitiesofpractice.(Kettley,2017)ConclusionShoddywasaprocessandmaterialinventedduringtheindustrialrevolution.Theenvironmentsinmanyof the industries at that time were notorious for their appalling working conditions and for theunscrupulousnessoftheentrepreneursintheirpursuitofprofit.Theshoddyindustryhasbeenrecordednodifferentlyalongwith theadditional spectacleof the ‘devil’and the ‘devil’sdust’.Thiswas furtheraddedtowiththewidelyheldideathatshoddyhidfilth,diseasesandthatsomeone’soldclothing,whowaseither foreign,destituteorcriminal,had found itsway into thecloth, in someway.Although theideaofbrandingproductsdidnotfullydevelopuntilmuchlater,the‘aura’(Benjamin,1935)surroundingshoddy,atthistime,didnotbodewellforitsstatusandpopularity.Engelswentasfarastosayshoddyrepresentedclassrepression.In Prato, a different reputation and system surrounded the development of shoddy. One simpledifference is that theadjectivemeaningof shoddywas lost in translationanddidnot carry the sameconnotations. Italy responded to the challenges they faced after the Second World War withinventivenessandhumilitybytakingonaprocessthatwasdifficult,messyandrequiredhardworktomakethebusinessthrive,albeitwithsomewhatbetterworkingconditionsthanthe19thcenturyEnglish

VETTESE


10

and American shoddy mills. However, ‘recycling’ was not a process particularly linked to the Italianfashion industry, despitemany of the well known fashion houses buying from Prato (Bijaoui, 2015).Morerecently,thishaschangedwithPratoimpartingitssustainablecredentials.The processes undertaken in this project emulate Prato shoddy inmanyways. Although this projectcouldhavetakenplaceanywhere,theinclusionofScottishwastetextiles,andthereputationthat‘Madein Scotland’ has, will be a starting point for further investigations intowhether a newmaterial (andrelativelynewdigital craftprocess)cancarry thisprovenance. Itwill look intowhethercharacteristicsthat were previously demonised, such as the inclusion of unusable ‘floor sweepings’ within the 3Dprintablematerial,canbeasellingpoint.Withdigitalcraft,inparticular3Dprinting,ideasaroundwhatmakes an object ‘authentic’ are repositioned. Because of the experiential nature of the 3D printingprocess and the little glitches that occur in each print, a 3D printed object can be unique andmassproduced,handcraftedanddigitallycreatedand incorporate the impressionof theuniquepassionofthe creator. It is anticipated that the addition of the material created in this project will not onlyinnovate in theproducts that are created,but also challengeperceptionsofwhat Scottish traditionalcraftandtextilesare.

Figure1.ShoddyfabricSource:TDRG-Source

Figure2.ExampleofshoddyConfederateuniform

Source:TDRG-Source

VETTESE


11

Figure3.Devil’steethSource:TDRG-Source

Figure4.CardatorecycledwoolSource:TDRG-Source

VETTESE


12

Figure5.TDRG–SelvedgesoldforknittingSource:TDRG-Source

Figure6.woolyarnlaminatedwithPLASource:TDRG-Source

VETTESE


13

Figure7.LasercutribbonmadewithrecycledwoolandPLASource:TDRG-Source

Figure8.Earlyexperimentwith3Dprintedwool

Source:TDRG-Source

VETTESE


14

Figure9.3DprintedwoolbySarahTaylorSource:TDRG-Source

AcknowledgementsTheauthor/swouldliketoextendthankstoAriLoughlin,ResearchAssistantonthisprojectThisresearchhasbeenfundedbytheTextilesFutureForum

ReferencesBijaoui, I., 2015. The Open Incubator Model: Entrepreneurship, Open Innovation, and EconomicDevelopmentinthePeriphery.Cologne,Springer.Benjamin,W.,1935.Theworkofartintheageofmechanicalreproduction.London,Penguin.Boorstin,D.,1961.Fromtravelertotourist:Thelostartoftravel.Theimage:Aguidetopseudo-eventsinAmerica,pp.77-117.Bunker,G.L.andAppel,J.,1994."Shoddy,"Anti-SemitismandtheCivilWar.AmericanJewishHistory,82(1/4),pp.43-71.Cardato,2017,MadeinPrato,<http://www.cardato.it/en/en-home/>Accessed29thMay2017Carlyle, T., 1867, Shooting Niagara : and After? Macmillan's MagazineVol.XVI,pp.674–687.Collins,M.andWeiss,M.,2015.Theroleofprovenanceinluxurytextilebrands.InternationalJournalofRetail&DistributionManagement,43(10/11),pp.1030-1050.Crane, D., 2012. Fashion and its social agendas: Class, gender, and identity in clothing. University ofChicagoPress.

VETTESE


15

Engels,F.,1897,TheConditionoftheWorkingClassinEngland,Oxford,OxfordUniversityPress.Fels,D.andHamilton,G.G.,2013.Thesocialsourcesofmigrationandenterprise: ItalianpeasantsandChinesemigrantsinPrato.EastAsia,31pp.269–287.Fletcher,K.,2013.Sustainablefashionandtextiles:designjourneys.London,Routledge.Foster, J.,2003.Classstruggleandthe industrial revolution:early industrialcapitalism inthreeEnglishtowns.London,Routledge.Gershenfeld,N.,2008.Fab:thecomingrevolutiononyourdesktop--frompersonalcomputerstopersonalfabrication.NewYork,BasicBooks.Hem, L. and Iverson,N.M., 2003. Context effects in brandextensions: implications for evaluations. InAnnualEMACConferenceProceedings.Jubb, S., 1860.The history of the shoddy-trade: its rise, progress, and present position. Houlston andWright.Kapferer, J.N. andBastien, V., 2012.The luxury strategy: Break the rules ofmarketing to build luxurybrands.Koganpagepublishers.Kettley,S.,2010.Fluidityincraftandauthenticity.Interactions,17(5),pp.12-15.MacCannell, D., 1973. Staged authenticity: Arrangements of social space in tourist settings.AmericanjournalofSociology,79(3),pp.589-603.Moisley,H.A.,1961,HarrisTweed :AGrowingHighland Industry,EconomicGeography,vol.37,no4,pp.353–370.Pike, S., 2009. Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations. Tourismmanagement,30(6),pp.857-866.Reisinger,Y.andSteiner,C.J.,2006.Reconceptualizingobjectauthenticity.Annalsof tourismresearch,33(1),pp.65-86.Roche, D. and Birrell, J., 1996. The Culture of Clothing: Dress and Fashion in the Ancien Regime.CambridgeUniversityPress.Russell, S. and Ireland, A., 2016. Review of wool recycling and reuse. InNatural Fibres: Advances inScienceandTechnologyTowardsIndustrialApplications(pp.415-428).SpringerNetherlands.Shell, H. R, 2014, Shoddy heap : a material history between waste and manufacture, History andTechnology,vol.30,no.4,pp.374–394Shiner, L. (1994). " Primitive Fakes," " Tourist Art," and the Ideology of Authenticity. The Journal ofAestheticsandArtCriticism,52(2),225-234.Steiner,C.J.andReisinger,Y.,2006.Understandingexistentialauthenticity.AnnalsofTourismResearch,33(2),pp.299-318.

VETTESE


16

VetteseForster,S.andChristie,R.M.,2013.Thesignificanceoftheintroductionofsyntheticdyesinthemid 19th century on the democratisationofwestern fashion. JAIC-Journal of the International ColourAssociation,11.Wright,D.G.,1969.BradfordandtheAmericanCivilWar.TheJournalofBritishStudies,8(2),pp.69-85.DrSamanthaVetteseDr Samantha Vettese is a Reader in Applied Art andDesign at EdinburghNapierUniversity, teachingDesignHistoryon theCritical andContextual Studiesprogramme.Her firstdegree is in JewelleryandSilversmithingwithaPhDin‘TheRelationshipbetweenArtandFashionintheTwentiethCentury’.Herresearch is interdisciplinary working with Tourism, Music, Computing, Advanced Materials [email protected]

Documents

3D printable recycled textiles : material innovation and a …/media/worktribe/output-992046/... · The research team’s project, which utilises waste from the Scottish textile industry