Toys''R''Cloth: An alternative interpretation of Kente cloth

(1)

- An alternative interpretation of Kente cloth

by Felicia Hansen

Bachelor in Fine Arts, Textile Design Degree work number: 2020.4.01

Date: 26.06.2020

(2)

Degree work

Bachelor in Fine Arts, Textile Design The Swedish School of Textiles University of Borås

Borås, Sweden

Title

Toys’’R’’Cloth

An alternative interpretation of Kente cloth Author

Felicia Hansen

Degree work number 2020.4.01

Date 26.06.2020 Supervisor Kathryn Walters Opponent Marit Salolainen

Professor in textile design, Alto University Class opponent

Flora Jones Examiner Delia Dumitrescu

Professor in textile design, University of Borås

(3)

1.1 Representative images of work:

(4)

Piece 1 – Reinterpretation of surface.

(5)

Piece 2 – Reinterpretation of form.

(6)

Piece 3 – Reinterpretation of construction.

(7)

1.2 Abstract:

This degree work places itself within the field of textile design, with an artistic approach. The motive with this work is to introduce Kente cloth as a textile expression to be developed as a contemporary textile technique. The aim is to explore ways of reinterpreting the West African weaving technique of Kente cloth in combination with the use of recycled toys in order to create contemporary artistic textile designs. The design method consisted of workshops that focused on the deconstruction of the technique and the categorisation of toys. Experimental sketches on the handloom and jacquard machine were produced. The outcome of this design work is a collection of three handwoven artistic textile designs.

Toys’’R’’Cloth engages the viewer to produce more sustainable designs by using recycled toys as material reuse. This work and its design method have the potential to be developed further and applied onto other textile techniques.

1.3 Keywords:

Textile design, Kente cloth, toys, reuse, weaving, art, deconstruction, construction, stripes, interpretation.

(8)

Table of content:

1.1Representative images of work: ... 2

1.2 Abstract: ... 6

1.3 Keywords: ... 6

2.1 Introduction to the field: ... 8

2.2 Motive and Idea discussion: ... 9

2.3. Aim: ... 10

3.1 Design method: ... 11

3.2 Pre-study: ... 12

3.3 Material: ... 13

3.4 Workshop 1 – Deconstruction of Kente cloth: ... 14

3.4.1 Deconstruction 1: ... 14

3.5 Workshop 2 – Categorisation of toys: ... 16

3.5.1 Toys – General group: ... 17

3.5.2 Toys – Size: ... 18

3.5.3 Toys – Form: ... 19

3.5.4 Toys – Colour: ... 20

3.5.5 Toys – Conclusion on toys workshop: ... 21

3.6 Workshop 3 – Stripe library: ... 21

3.7 Development of piece 1: ... 25

3.7.1 Scale: ... 26

3.7.2 Colour: ... 27

3.7.3 Development of stripe for piece 1: ... 28

3.7.4 Integration of toys in piece 1: ... 29

3.7.5 Construction of piece 1: ... 30

3.8.1 Sketch development of piece 2: ... 32

3.8.2 Scale: ... 34

3.8.3 Integration of toys & colour for piece 2: ... 35

3.8.4 Construction of piece 2: ... 36

3.9.1 Development of scale and form for piece 3: ... 38

3.9.2 Colour scheme: ... 41

3.9.3 Development of stripe for piece 3: ... 42

4.1 Result: ... 44

4.1.1 Piece 1: ... 45

4.1.2 Piece 2: ... 46

4.2.3 Piece 3: ... 47

4.2 Presentation: ... 48

4.3 Conclusion: ... 49

4.4 Discussion: ... 50

5 Table of figures: ... 51

6 References: ... 52

(9)

2.1 Introduction to the field:

Kente cloth (1992) has become one of the most well-known textile techniques of West Africa and is easily recognized by its vivid colour palette (figure 1). Kente cloth is produced by weaving long pieces of multi coloured striped fabric on a special drag loom, which is afterwards sewn together to create a bigger fabric. It is important when sewing Kente cloth stripes together to match and mismatch the striped patterns correctly, so the entire fabric will have a uniform pattern repeat on its entire surface (Adler and Bernard, 1992). The technique of Kente cloth can therefore be roughly defined as stripes in different colour combinations being sewn together in order to create a bigger textile.

El Anatsui (2017) is a Ghanaian artist focusing on interpreting and recreating the expression of Kente cloth, mostly in a sculptural manner. He uses the technique to investigate the aesthetic possibilities of waste, such as liqueur bottle caps (figure 2). Another artist that reuses waste to create new works of art is Japanese artist Hiroshi Fuji (2010), who reuses old toys and constructs them together to create new figures and forms. Hiroshi Fuji does this without dismantling or destroying the recycled toys (figure 3). Argentine Agustina Woodgate (2017) does the opposite. In her design project ARC- Animal Rug Company, she unstitches and dismantles used stuffed animals in order to create rugs (figure 4). Another artist that works with stuffed animals as a source of textile material is American born Mike Kelley (1991). In his artwork Deodorized Central Mass with Satellites he makes use of recycled stuffed animals to create forms in order to convey a story, but he does not dismantle or unstitch the animals (figure 5). Shabnam Faraee (2016) also tells a story with her textile pattern Sill & Potatis. She manages to combine two symbolic expressions found in Swedish food traditions and traditional printing techniques from Iran (figure 6).

These artists all experiment with the reinterpretation of known forms, combining and reusing waste materials, except Faraee that works with combining known traditions. They investigate each of their chosen waste material in different ways, some of them through deconstruction, others keep their materials in the original form. Fuji, Woodgate and Kelley make use of toys as material for reuse. By doing this, focus is put on the children toys industry that continually produces new toys.

Their artworks give new life to discarded toys and give them a new purpose.

Figure 1: Peter Adler & Nicholas Barnard, Asambo Nsaduaso, 1991.

Figure 2: El Anatsui, Resolution, 2017.

Figure 3: Hiroshi Fuji, Toys Paradise, 2010. Figure 4: Agustina Woodgate, Jardin Secrero, 2017.

Figure 5

:

Mike Kelley, Deodorized Central Mass with Satellites, 1991.

Figure 6: Shabnam Faraee, Sill &

Potatis, 2016.

(10)

2.2 Motive and Idea discussion:

This design work is based on a personal curiosity into West African textile

techniques, especially woven techniques. This is combined with memories of being a child, in the form of toys. This work will focus on the reinterpretation of the West African weaving technique Kente cloth and combine it with recycled toys.

Greg Lynn (2009) makes use of toys as a material reuse. He creates products for interior by deconstructing the form of plastic toys and reconstructs them together in new forms. He connects these newly made forms with new elements to create furniture (figure 7). Another artist that makes use of only material reuse is costume and jewellery designer Sophie Cochevelou (2013). She sources material at car booth sales and creates out from her findings. The material she uses is recycled, from base material to every piece of toy. In this way, she creates new artwork and give new life to recycled toys, but also discarded textiles in the form of dresses, shoes, hats, masks and so on (figure 8). Emily Dvorin (n. d.) also makes use of discarded material, but she combines it with new elements to create form. In her pieces LESSON LEARNED, she combines recycled plastic letters with new cable ties to create a basket. By doing this she amplifies the reuse of recycled objects merged with newly sourced or created objects (figure 9).

The motive with this work is to introduce Kente cloth as a textile expression to be developed as a contemporary textile technique. In the reinterpretation recycled toys are used. Toys are easily recognised objects, universal symbols of childhood, which can be found in a wide variety of expressions, from soft, textile to hard, plastic. In this project, the toys that are used, have all been discarded and can therefore be seen as a material reuse, but also expressional and symbolic objects.

By combining new textile expressions of Kente cloth and recycled toys, the purpose of this project is to design contemporary artistic textile designs. These artistic textile designs investigate ways of reinterpreting the technique of Kente cloth by replacing elements of the original technique.

Figure 7: Greg Lynn, The Duck Table, 2009.

Figure 8: Sophie Cochevelou, Barbie face, 2019.

Figure 9: Emily Dvorin, LESSON LEARNED, n. d.

(11)

2.3. Aim:

The aim is to explore ways of reinterpreting the West African weaving technique of Kente cloth in combination with the use of recycled toys in order to create contemporary artistic textile designs.

(12)

3.1 Design method:

The design method for this project is based on practice-based research according to Gjoko Muratovski (2016). Practice-based research is when practical work is carried out during the design process to gain more knowledge. This research method was altered to fit this specific design project, which consists of multiple workshop as a way of sketching and analysing. The design process was conducted as seen below:

Research:

Visual research was conducted to place the work within the field of the state of the art. Literature was also source to learn of the technique of Kente cloth.

Pre-study:

Results from the pre-study was selected for further development.

Workshop 1 – Deconstruction of Kente cloth:

A deconstruction workshop of the technique of Kente cloth was conducted.

Sketches for further development was created and selected.

Workshop 2 – Categorisation of toys:

A workshop into the categorisation of toys was conducted. Toys was divided into different groups and analysed.

Workshop 3 – Stripe library:

Different stripes were created and collected in a stripe library.

Limitations:

Selected sketches and samples from the pre-study phase was chosen to be carried further in combination with gained knowledge and sketches from workshop 1-3.

Experimentations:

Sketches was collected and produced into new sketches in paper. These sketches were done in other material, photographed and sketched on again, but digitally.

This procedure was repeated multiple times.

Scale:

Scale was investigated by sketching in material and then sketched digitally.

Colour:

Different colour ways were explored.

Prototypes:

Prototypes was created in the handloom and on the jacquard machine.

Technical development:

Technical descriptions were done to fully understand the measurements of the stripe in combination with the toys and how to execute it on the handloom.

Production - construction:

Samples was chosen for production and constructed together with the toys to create the final pieces.

(13)

3.2 Pre-study:

This project was based on a previous study of the technical prerequisites of the technique of Kente cloth. The aim of the pre-study was to explore ways of reinterpreting Kente cloth with the use of recycled toys. This was done to find ways to create contemporary artistic textile design suggestions for further development. Research was done visual and through literature to get a better understand of what defines Kente cloth. This resulted in sketches done in paper, that was taken further to the weaving machines (figure 10). Recycled toys were sourced in second-hand shops. The toys were deconstructed and recoloured in order to understand the different properties of the toys and how to manipulate them (figure 11-12).

Three different pathways were chosen for further development (figure 13-15).

Figure 10: Paper sketches from pre-study.

Figure 11-12: Recycled toys being recoloured and deconstructed. Figure 13-15: The three pathways chosen for further development.

(14)

3.3 Material:

Due to the composition of toys and textile being the primary focus of this design work, material was not prioritized. A choice was made in the pre-study to use cotton in the textile pieces (figure 16). Cotton was chosen due to it being sturdy and flexible, as well as it being a natural material, while toys are normally produced out of plastic. The combination of these two materials would create contrast in both materials, concerning source, but also tactility.

Figure 16: Material test from pre-study. Investigating different materials properties.

(15)

3.4 Workshop 1 – Deconstruction of Kente cloth:

Three workshops were conducted with the use of words as a method for

deconstruction. Three questions were created based on what defines the technique of Kente cloth. The questions were answered with words or sentences, that afterwards were illustrated in quick paper sketches. After the workshop the sketches were analysed and gained knowledge was taken further in the design process.

3.4.1 Deconstruction 1:

First deconstruction question: ‘’What does Kente cloth consist of?’’.

This question was answered by listing down what Kente cloth is and then finding the opposite words to define what Kente cloth is not (figure 17). The opposite words were combined with two correct words in three different combinations.

These combinations were illustrated in paper (figure 18).

Figure 17: First deconstruction question of three with answers.

Figure 18: Paper sketches created from the answers from deconstruction question one of three. The sketches illustrate the direct association the words gave.

(16)

Second deconstruction question: ‘’What is the form of Kente cloth?’’.

The question was quickly answered with four words, that defined what the form of Kente cloth is. These words created the fundament for brainstorming and new sentences were created (figure 19). These sentences were afterwards illustrated in paper (figure 20-29).

Figure 26: Illustration of sentence 7.

Figure 19: Second deconstruction question of three with answers.

Figure 20: Illustration

of sentence 1. Figure 21: Illustration

of sentence 2. Figure 22: Illustration of sentence 3.

(17)

Third deconstruction question: ‘’What is Kente cloth?’’.

This question was answered with a sentence that defined what Kente cloth is. The three describing words in the sentence were found and marked. Afterwards the placement of these words was changed to create new sentences (figure 30). These sentences were illustrated in paper (figure 31-40).

Figure 30: Third deconstruction question out of three with answers.

Figure 31-32: Illustration of sentence 1.

Figure 33-34: Illustration of sentence 2. Figure 35: Illustration of sentence 3.

Figure 36-38: Illustration of sentence 4.

(18)

3.5 Workshop 2 – Categorisation of toys:

An analysing workshop into the categorisation of the toys was conducted. This was done to understand the different aspects, that the toys could contribute with and how this could be used in the design work.

3.5.1 Toys – General group:

Categorisation based on what the toys could be defined as, by first intuition. It resulted in nine groups (figure 41-49).

Figure 41: Toys being divided roughly by what identifies them.

This group consisted of plastic toy animals.

This group consisted of Toy blocks and Legos.

This group consisted of stuffed toy animals.

This group consisted of toy humans.

This group consisted of plastic toy letters.

This group consisted of toy vehicles.

This group consisted of toy action figures.

This group consisted of toy objects.

This group consisted of toy soldiers.

(19)

3.5.2 Toys – Size:

Categorisation based on the size of the toys.

It resulted in six groups (figure 50-55).

Figure 50: Toys being divided by size.

This groups consisted of the largest toys.

This groups consisted of the second largest toys.

This groups consisted of the third largest toys.

This groups consisted of the third smallest toys.

This groups consisted of the second smallest toys.

This groups consisted of the smallest toys.

(20)

3.5.3 Toys – Form:

Categorisation based on the form of the toys. Four forms were found: circle, square, triangle and rectangle (figure 56-59).

Figure 56: Toys being divided by form, circle.

Figure 59: Toys being divided by form, rectangular.

Figure 58: Toys being divided by form, triangle.

Figure 57: Toys being divided by form, square.

(21)

3.5.4 Toys – Colour:

Categorisation based on the colour of the toys. This resulted in twelve groups and one group for toys, that could not be defined by any colour (figure 60).

Figure 60: Toys being roughly divided by colour. Toys having more than two colours where defined by its most dominating colour.

Figure 61: Toys that could not be defined by colour, because it consisted of too many different colours.

(22)

3.5.5 Toys – Conclusion on toys workshop:

The toy-based workshop resulted in a final categorisation of the toys that was taken further into development of the design work. The toys were divided into three categories depending on form. Then within each of these groups the toys were divided by colour.

The final categorisation made it possible to use the form of the toys as a way to add structure to the design and use the toys original colour as an artistic

expression. Each of the groups were named to keep better track on them (figure 62-99).

As a result of this workshop all of the textile-based toys were discarded. This was done to create more focus on the reuse of plastic toys merged with textile elements.

Figure 62: Final categorisation group, ‘’Humans’’.

Figure 63: Green human formed toys.

Toys found inside the categorisation group, ‘’Humans’’:

Figure 67: Brown human formed toys.

Figure 71: Red human formed toys.

Figure 64: Orange human formed toys.

Figure 68: White human formed toys.

Figure 72: Black human formed toys.

Figure 65: Grey human formed toys.

Figure 69: Pink human formed toys.

Figure 73: Purple human formed toys.

Figure 66: Beige human formed toys.

Figure 70: Yellow human formed toys.

Figure 74: Blue human formed toys.

(23)

Figure 75: Final categorisation group, ‘’Objects’’.

Toys found inside the categorisation group, ‘’Objects’’:

Figure 76: Purple toy objects.

Figure 80: Blue toy objects.

Figure 84: Black toy objects.

Figure 77: White toy objects.

Figure 81: Pink toy objects.

Figure 85: Yellow toy objects.

Figure 78: Green toy objects.

Figure 82: Orange toy objects.

Figure 86: Grey toy objects.

Figure 79: Red toy objects.

Figure 83: Brown toy objects.

(24)

Figure 87: Final categorisation group, ‘’Animals’’.

Toys found inside the categorisation group, ‘’Animals’’:

Figure 88: Green animal formed toys.

Figure 92: Brown animal formed toys.

Figure 96: Red animal formed toys.

Figure 89: Orange animal formed toys.

Figure 93: White animal formed toys.

Figure 97: Black animal formed toys.

Figure 90: Grey animal formed toys.

Figure 94: Pink animal formed toys.

Figure 98: Purple animal formed toys.

Figure 91: Beige animal formed toys.

Figure 95: Yellow animal formed toys.

Figure 99: Blue animal formed toys.

(25)

3.6 Workshop 3 – Stripe library:

Visual research created the fundament for a stripe library (figure 100-101). The stripes were not a final product but would work as a source for inspiration when creating stripes for the final pieces (figure 102-103). A selection of the stripes was woven on the handloom to see the appearance of the stripe in textile (figure 104).

Figure 101: Inspiration found in textbook. Example of original Kente cloth.

Peter Adler & Nicholas Barnard, Asambo Nsaduaso

& Mmaban N’toma

,

^1991.

Figure 100: Paper sketches from pre-study.

Figure 102-103: Stripe library. Different stripes were created digitally, and all created stripes became a part of the stripe library. None of the stripes were taken away in the design process and the colour combination in this step of the process were not important.

The appearance of the stripes was based in visual research into Kente cloth.

Figure 104: Selected samples handwoven to see the appearance of the stripe in textile.

(26)

3.7 Development of piece 1:

Sketches from the pre-study, the first deconstruction question with sketches and the toys in the group humans, became the fundament for this design direction (figure 105-107). The sketches from the pre-study showed how the technique of Kente cloth could be deconstructed into stripes that were not connected. The toys in the group humans were chosen, because of its small curvy edges that could be a good contrast to the textile. Based on these three variables a sketch was conducted as a suggestion for the final piece (figure 108).

Figure 105: Illustrations and samples from pre- study.

Figure 106: Sketch from

deconstruction workshop, question 1 of 3.

Figure 108: Sketch suggestion for the final piece.

Figure 107: Toys in the categorisation group ‘’Humans’’.

(27)

3.7.1 Scale:

An investigation into scale was conducted. A sketch fabric was cut into different sizes and placed in various combinations. This resulted in a wanted scale of 1,5 m in length and 15 cm in width (figure 109-112). This scale was chosen due to wanting a final piece that was higher than the average human being, when being displayed 0,5-1 meter over the ground.

Figure 109-112: Researching wanted scale for final piece in fabric.

(28)

3.7.2 Colour:

The colour scheme for this piece was based on association. Toys are normally associated with joy, happiness and warmth. Therefore, orange and yellow was chosen due to being warm colours. Purple was chosen as a contrasting colour to yellow and orange. Black and white was chosen to add contrast to the saturation (figure 113).

Figure 113: Colour scheme for piece 1.

(29)

3.7.3 Development of stripe for piece 1:

The stripe for piece 1 was created by projecting different stripe from the stripe library onto a fabric. Different stripe combinations were drawn directly onto the fabric and toys were placed in various compositions on the fabric, to see how to incorporate them into the stripe (figure 114-116).

Figure 114-116: The creation of the stripe for piece 1.

(30)

3.7.4 Integration of toys in piece 1:

The toys were taken to the loom to investigate how to integrate them into the textile (figure 117-120). This resulted in a design change in the colour scheme and two extra colours were added. A decision was made to integrate the toys with the textile, by the use of a backing in full colour. The colour of the backing was chosen to correspond with the toys (figure 121). In this process, a decision to limit the group of toys to use in the final piece was made. This choice was based on the amount of toys that were in the different colour groups. The amount was bigger in the beige, brown and green colour group, they were therefore chosen. A final technical sketch was made to be taken to the handloom for production (figure 122).

Figure 117-120: Investigation into how to combine the toys and textile. Toys were placed as the weft and placed vertical between the warp in the handloom.

Figure 121: Final colour scheme for piece 1 with the two added colours.

Figure 122: Technical sketch for piece 1.

(31)

3.7.5 Construction of piece 1:

After the textile had been woven on the handloom, it was cut into right size and the edges were folded and sewn (figure 123-126). The toys were placed on the textile and sewn onto the surface (figure 127-129).

Figure 123-126: The stripe for piece 1 being produced. Afterwards the edges were folded, cut and sewn.

Figure 127-129: Toys being placed on textile and sewn onto the surface. The toys were placed so they filled the square in the most

(32)

31

Sketches from the pre-study, the second deconstruction question with sketches and the toys in the group objects, became the fundament for this design direction (figure 130-132). The chosen sketches from the pre-study showed, how the

technique of Kente cloth could be deconstructed into stripes that were connected in some parts of the textile. The toys in the group objects were chosen, because of its sharp edges that could be a good contrast to the textile. Based on these three variables a sketch was conducted as a suggestion for the final piece (figure 133).

Figure 130: Illustration from pre-study.

Figure 131: Sketch from second deconstruction

workshop. Figure 133: Sketch suggestion for the final

Figure 132: Toys in the categorisation group ‘’Objects’’.

(33)

3.8.1 Sketch development of piece 2:

The sketch suggestion for the final piece was taken to the jacquard loom and executed (figure 134). In the process of investigating how to integrate toys and textile, it was found that the form of the design had to be developed further (figure 135). This was due to wanting a more contemporary expression for the final design. This resulted in a new sketch for the final piece (figure 136).

Figure 134: Textile sketches from jacquard loom.

Figure 136: Textile created on the jacquard loom became the foundation for further development of the form of Kente cloth.

This resulted in new sketches that were taken to the handloom.

Figure 135: Investigation into how to integrate toys and textile.

(34)

After the sketch process, the first prototype was created (figure 137-138). In the process of analysing how the textile and toys reacted together, a decision to flip the stripe from being vertical to horizontal was made (figure 139-140). This decision was done to create focus on the form of the stripe and not the stripe on the form (figure 141-142).

Figure 137: New sketch suggestion for final piece.

Figure 138: Experimentation of how to connect the toys.

Figure 139-140: Analysing the forms created in the first prototype.

Figure 141-142: The stripe of piece 2 was flipped to be horizontal. Hence it would put more focus on the form of textile connected with the toys.

(35)

3.8.2 Scale:

An investigation in the scale for piece 2 was conducted. Circular forms in different sized was created in fabric. The forms were places on top of each other. This resulted in a wanted scale of 1 m in circumference, due to it being the step before the forms started to collapse. This scale was also chosen, because it was a good reference scale to piece 1. The two final pieces would have almost to same width (figure 143-146).

Figure 143-146: Researching scale for piece 2 in fabric.

(36)

3.8.3 Integration of toys & colour for piece 2:

The toys in group objects were placed in their different colour group to see which toys to use. In this process it was decided only to use the toy cars, due to wanting a more uniform look on the surface of the final piece (figure 147-148). The chosen toys were place on a fabric and out from this the stripe was created with inspiration from the stripe library. Due to only having certain amount of toy cars in each colour group. The groups with the biggest number of toys was chosen. The colour scheme for piece 2 was based on the colour of the chosen toy cars to be able to create a repeat in the stripe (figure 149-150). A technical sketch was created for production on the handloom (figure 151-152).

Figure 147: Toys being placed out according to their colour.

Figure 148: It was decided only to use the toy cars and similar objects in this

Figure 149-150: Toys being placed out on a textile to create the strip for piece 2. This also created the colour scheme for piece 2.

Figure 151-152: Technical sketch to take to the handloom. This sketch illustrated which parts of the final piece that would be in textile and which

would consist of toys.

(37)

The textile for piece 2 were woven on the handloom and the edges were folded and sewn (figure 153-154). The toys were connected by drilling holes in them and stringing them on monofilament. Monofilament was used to be able to keep the see-through effect between the cars (figure 155-156). Due to wanting variation in the size of the whole collection and the form starting to collapse, a decision was made to remove a part of the report. This resulted in a final technical sketch were the height was 95 cm (figure 157).

Figure 153: The woven stripes from the handloom.

Figure 154: Edges being folded, steamed and sewn.

Figure 155-156: Toys being constructed together with the use of monofilament and textile being sewn together.

Figure 157: Final technical sketch with a height of 95 cm.

(38)

Sketches from the pre-study, the third deconstruction question with sketches and the toys in the group animals, became the fundament for this design direction (figure 158-160). The sketches from the pre-study showed how the technique of Kente cloth could be deconstructed into stripes that were connected by teddies as a canvas for the stripes. The toys in the group animals were chosen, because of its curvy, soft and round edges that could create a good contrast to the textile. Based on these three variables a sketch was conducted as a suggestion for the final piece (figure 161-162).

Figure 158: Illustration from pre-study.

Figure 159: Sketch from third deconstruction workshop.

Figure 161-162: Sketch suggestions for the final piece.

Figure 160: Toys in the categorisation group ‘’Animals’’.

(39)

3.9.1 Development of scale and form for piece 3:

A research into the size, scale and form of piece 3 was conducted. The toys were placed next to the textile to represent how the toys could be a way for the textile to be connected together. Hence piece 1 being 1,5 meters, a three-meter-long fabric was chosen as a sketching tool. This was done to illustrate that piece 3 would consist of two stripes of Kente cloth that would not be cut in the middle (figure 163-168).

Figure 163-168: Researching wanted scale and form for final piece in textile.

(40)

The research into the size, scale and form of piece 3 resulted in a new form and colour way for the final piece. The toys would work as a way of connecting the textile, but also a way of deciding the colour of the stripe depending of were the toys were connected to the textile (figure 169-170).

Figure 169-170: Sketches of how the toys works as a way for deciding the colour way of the stripe. The toys that connect to the textile decides the colour to use.

(41)

A further investigation into how to amplify the use of toys as the material that connects the stripe together, resulted in dividing the stripe into smaller pieces.

Different compositions were tested, and one was chosen dues to it having more open directions (figure 171-175). The red, blue and yellow toys was placed first, then the toys with the colour corresponding to how the colour would mix, was placed next (figure 176-183).

This resulted in a new sketch for the final piece (figure 184-185).

Figure 171-175: New research into wanted forma and scale for final piece in textile.

Figure 176-183: Toys being placed next to textile to see the colour way. Red, yellow and blue was placed first, then the toys with the colour corresponding to how the colour would mix.

1. Red, yellow and blue toys. 5. + Purple toys.

2. + Green toys. 6. + Black toys.

3. + Orange toys. 7. + Pink toys.

4. + Brown, beige and white toys. 8. + Grey toys.

Chosen composition due to it having more open directions.

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8

(42)

3.9.2 Colour scheme:

The colour scheme for this piece was decided out from the toys within the group animals (figure 186). A bright fully saturated colour scheme for the yarns was chosen based on the colour of the toys used and due to wanting a bright colour result for the final piece (187-199).

Figure 184-185: Final sketch for piece 3. The final sketch was transferred to a sketch where the stripes had the same size. This was done to limit the size differences to the toys.

Figure 186: Chosen colour scheme for piece 3.

Figure 187-199: Colour investigation of yarns to find the correct shade.

Same colour of yarns as in piece 1 and 2 was also used in this piece,

(43)

3.9.3 Development of stripe for piece 3:

The stripe for piece 3 was created out from the same principle as piece 1. Different stripes from the stripe library was projected onto fabric stripes (figure 200-201).

Three stripes were chosen and recreated digitally (figure 202-204). Afterwards the stripes were divided in different ways, before creating a technical sketch for production on the handloom (figure 205-206).

Figure 200-201: The stripe for piece 3 was created by projecting different stripes from the stripe library on the textile. Three stripe suggestions were created and taken further digital.

Figure 202-204: The stripes were recreated digital and divided different ways. The first stripe with the first version of division was chosen. The stripe was chosen hence it has the most complex stripe combination combined with bigger colour blocks. The division of the stripe was chosen due to it was

were the stipe was divided in the most different ways.

Figure 205: The stripes were placed digitally next to the toys to see how the result could look. A combination where the chosen stripe was placed in different directions was chosen. This was due to

wanting variation in the direction of the stripe in the final piece.

Figure 206: Technical sketch to take to the handloom were produced digitally.

(44)

The stripe for piece 3 was woven on the handloom according to the technical sketch and the edges was folded and sewn (figure 207-208). The toys were connected together by drilling holes in them and stringing them together with monofilament. Monofilament was chosen in order to maintain the see-through effect between the toys. Afterwards the textile and toys were constructed together (figure 209-210).

Figure 207: The woven stripe from the handloom before being cut, steamed and sewn.

Figure 208: The edges were cut and sewn. Figure 209-210: The toys and textile were constructed together with the use of monofilament.

(45)

4.1 Result:

This design project resulted in a textile collection consisting of three

interpretations of the West African technique of Kente cloth. The textile pieces show how Kente cloth can be interpreted to be contemporary artistic textile design in combination with recycled toys.

(46)

4.1.1 Piece 1:

Piece 1 shows how the stripe of Kente cloth have been developed into a contemporary version of the original technique. It consists of three separate

hanging textiles in bright colour with toys sewn onto the surface. The use of toys in this piece helps to interrupt the normally smooth surface of Kente cloth.

Figure 212-213: Piece 1 – Reinterpretation of surface.

(47)

4.1.2 Piece 2:

Piece 2 shows how the form of Kente cloth can be interpreted as a tubular textile form, that plays with the meeting of two different surfaces. In this case the hard toy cars and the bendable textile stripes.

Figure 214-215: Piece 2 – Reinterpretation of form.

(48)

4.2.3 Piece 3:

Piece 3 consist of a deconstructed strip of Kente cloth, that has been reconstructed by joining through the use of recycled toys. Furthermore, the toys determine the colourway of the textile.

Figure 216-217: Piece 3 – Reinterpretation of construction.

(49)

4.2 Presentation:

The pieces were presented in a composition allowing comparison between the different scales and aspects of how Kente cloth has been reinterpreted and combined with recycled toys. The overall expression of the textile collection should be strong enough to clearly communicate the concept within.

Piece 1 were hanging, and the stripes of the piece were placed 7 cm apart. The stripes were also displayed hanging uneven to be able to amplify the pattern repeat of the stripe. Piece 2 and Piece 3 were placed on podiums. Piece 2 were placed on a high podium, due to it being a form that the viewer should have the possibility to look inside of. Piece 3 were placed on a low podium with an angle, due to it being a piece that mainly has to be viewed from above (figure 218).

For the photo shoot a white backdrop was chosen to create contract and focus on the colour of the whole collection.

Figure 218: Illustration of wanted composition for the final collection.

(50)

4.3 Conclusion:

This design work has explored different ways of interpreting the technique of Kente cloth in combination with the use of recycled toys. Kente cloth has in this project been seen as a way of exploring how to deconstruct a known form and develop it into something new. The technique has been a fundament for an investigation into how to combine two different expressions, in the form of Kente cloth and discarded toys.

In this design project, the use of recycled toys has also produced a new vision for using toys as a material reuse. Toys have many different properties, but this

particular project puts focus on the meeting between textile and the plastic found in toys. Toys, as a material for reuse strengthen the vision for this design project, being a way of producing sustainable artistic textile design.

In Piece 1 the meet between the textile and the recycled toys are found in the interpretation of the surface of the Kente cloth. The colour of the textile is created to correspond with the colour of the toys used in the piece. This is done to create a merge between the textile and the toys.

In Piece 2 the merge is found in investigation of the form of the traditional Kente cloth. The toy cars are the element that decided the colour way of the full textile piece. The same base idea also applies in Piece 3. The use of colour therefore becomes a vital element in creating the merge between the two expressions.

All piece has in common that they bring the old and the new together in new creative design, just like Emily Dvorin (figure 9). In her piece LESSON LEARNED, she uses cable ties as the new element to connect reused toy letters together.

Another aspect that is found within these textile designs are the meeting between fast and slow. Kente cloth is a tradition filled weaving technique, that is very time consuming. It consists of weaving long stripes, that afterwards are sewn together.

While toys are objects that are easily produced. A thick hot plastic paste is pressed into forms and when cooled, solid plastic objects are ejected. Kente cloth can therefore be seen as a slow production process and toys as a fast production

process. This project combines these two different ways of producing, but still both parts, Kente cloth and toys, maintains history, tradition and nostalgia in their own way.

Through this design project it has been found that when creating artistic textile designs the use of recycled and newly source elements open up for another take on designing. With this project I want the public to see the possibilities of creating with reused elements, but also the possibilities in forgotten textile traditions.

(51)

4.4 Discussion:

In the field of textile design, there are many different ways of taking atypical material and creating something new. When taking atypical material in the form of reused toys, a sustainable approach to creating textile design appear. Agustina Woodgate (figure 4) uses recycled stuffed animals to create a new version of animal pelts for interior. The stuffed animals are deconstructed and sewn together to create new designs. In this way, new life is given to discarded materials. By bringing toys into design it also brings another layer of thinking to it. Toys become an artistic expression; hence it has its own recognisable expression. This opens up new opportunities for the art scene. Hiroshi Fuji (figure 3) uses only toys as artistic expression and manages to tell a story with only this material. In his piece Toy Paradise, he uses the form and colour of the toy to create a scene for the toys to be the narrator. He makes use of the toy’s natural artistic expression and draw the viewers in with it.

Kente cloth is a west African technique and expression that have been passed down in generations. It has through the years become a symbol for wealth and its colour have become a symbol for happiness. The technique itself has not been investigated by many people through times. Maybe due to the technique being outdated in comparison with the technical ability of our time. The stripes could easily be computerized and digital printed or woven in full size on jacquard machines. Then the steps of the textile stripes having to be sewn together could be outsource from the process, but then the question appears: is it still recognised as Kente cloth if the production process is changed?

El Anatsui (figure 2) interpret the expression of Kente cloth in recycled materials and creates abstract sculptures. His art often circles around the use of metal liquor bottle tops, that have been manipulated into the wanted form. This design project differs from Anatsui’s art by being textile and the recycled material has not been manipulated. The form has been maintained in the hope of it keeping its

recognisable form. This project also makes use of the traditional idea of making Kente cloth stripes and can be seen as a celebration of the technique.

To be able to create the designs of this project a design method based on the use of words and brainstorming was created. The design method was created as a way of opening up the mind to more ideas to design from. By letting the first part of the design method be words, the brain does not start creating design solutions from the beginning. When the words found in the first part of the method has to be

illustrated, there are more word to start from. In this way more design ideas are created. If words are found and illustrate at the same time, the possibility of

running out of words would appear. This design method is therefore suitable for designers that needs to expand the foundation they are designing from.

Something to be reflected on further, is the deconstruction of the expression within the pieces. It could be interesting to see how far the deconstruction of the toys could have been taken, before it is not recognisable. In this design work a choice was made to keep the toys in their original form, to maintain their expression, but dissolving them could be a new approach to integrate the toys to a textile

technique. This would result in a new overall expression for the design collection.

This work has the potential to be a pioneer for designing more sustainable artistic textile design, by re-visiting a traditional textile technique and new material for textile design. This opens up for material sourcing and creating material out from the old. It also opens up for the discussion about given new life and maintaining textile traditions, that have been overlooked. It could be a way of reintroducing textile techniques to parts of the world, where it is normally not known. This opens up for researching other techniques that could be reintroduce in this manner, by combining it with some recognisable.

Overall the design method and the foundation of this design project has the potential to be developed and altered to fit any other design-based projects.

(52)

5 Table of figures:

Front page image Photo: Felicia Hansen

Representative images of work Photo: Daniela Ferro

Figure 1

Adler, P. & Bernard, N. (1992). African Majesty. The Textile Art of the Ashanti and Ewe. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd.

Figure 2

Anatsui, E. (2017). Resolution. [image online] Available at: <https://elanatsui.art/

artworks/resolution-2017> [Accessed 27 Marts 2020]

Figure 3

Fuji, H. (2010). Toys Paradise. [image online] Available at: <http://www.moriyu- gallery.com/artists/work.html?artist_id=21&work_id=1&l=en> [Accessed 27 Marts 2020]

Figure 4

Woodgate, A. (2017). Jardin Secreto, Stuffed animal toy skins. [image online]

Available at:<https://files.cargocollective.com/c218465/2018_portfolio_GOO D.pdf> [Accessed 27 Marts 2020]

Figure 5

Kelley, M. (1991). Deodorized Central Mass with Satellites. [Image online]

Available at: <https://www.huffpost.com/entry/art-in-a-box-mike-kelley>

[Accessed 14 April 2020]

Figure 6

Faraee, S. (2016). Nordic Delight. Sill & Potatis. [image online] Available at:

<http://www.shabnamfaraee.com/Home/pattern/32> [Accessed 8 April 2020]

Figure 7

Lynn, Greg (2009). Recycled Toy Furniture. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Available at

<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ad.860> [Accessed 22 May 2020]

Figure 8

Cochevelou, S. (2019). Barbie face. [image online] Available at:

<http://www.sophiecochevelou.com/new-gallery> [Accessed 22 May 2020]

Figure 9

Dvorin, E. (n.d.). LESSON LEARNED. [image online] Available at

<https://www.emilydvorin.com/recentwork?ligh tbox=dataItem-jtzbkvmr> [Accessed 22 May 2020]

Figure 10-100 Photo: Felicia Hansen Figure 101

Figure 102-210 Photo: Felicia Hansen Figure 211-217 Photo: Daniela Ferro Figure 218

Photo: Felicia Hansen

(53)

6 References:

Anatsui, E. (2017). Resolution. [image online] Available at:

<https://elanatsui.art/artworks/resolution-2017> [Accessed 27 Marts 2020]

Cochevelou, S. (2019). Barbie face. [image online] Available at:

<http://www.sophiecochevelou.com/new-gallery> [Accessed 22 May 2020]

Dvorin, E. (n.d.). LESSON LEARNED. [image online] Available at

<https://www.emilydvorin.com/recentwork?lightbox=dataItem-jtzbkvmr>

[Accessed 22 May 2020]

Faraee, S. (2016). Nordic Delight. Sill & Potatis. [image online] Available at:

<http://www.shabnamfaraee.com/Home/pattern/32> [Accessed 8 April 2020]

Fuji, H. (2010). Toys Paradise. [image online] Available at: <http://www.mori yugallery.com/artists/work.html?artist_id=21&work_id=1&l=en> [Accessed 27 Marts 2020]

Holtzschue, L. (2006). Understanding color. An introduction for designers.

Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Kelley, M. (1991). Deodorized Central Mass with Satellites. [Image online]

Available at: <https://www.huffpost.com/entry/art-in-a-box-mike-kelley>

[Accessed 14 April 2020]

Lynn, Greg (2009). Recycled Toy Furniture. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Available at

<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ad.860> [Accessed 22 May 2020]

Muratovski, G. (2016). Research for designers. A guide to methods and practice.

London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Woodgate, A. (2017). Jardin Secreto, Stuffed animal toy skins. [image online]

Available at: <https://files.cargocollective.com/c218465/2018_portfolio_GOO D.pdf> [Accessed 27 Marts 2020]