When is it not Hardanger any more?

These photos are the work of my friend Cathinka, who is known online as Hardangerrebel. (You can find her on Instagram and Facebook under that name.) She’s been experimenting a lot with Hardanger – particularly lately – pushing the boundaries. Her moniker is quite apt! I have her permission to post these photos and open this discussion based on them.

A question I’d like to pose is, when is Hardanger not Hardanger any more? Or, when is any traditional embroidery style not that style any more? When does it stop being that style and start being something else?

I’ve written a book on Guimarães embroidery, which is embroidery that comes from the town of Guimarães in Portugal. In that town, to sell a piece of bordado de Guimarães (Guimarães embroidery) it must be first certified. This certification process ensures that standards are maintained and the technique remains true, and “the style” remains “the style”. It is the work made by the people of the town, in their traditional style, and of a high standard of craftsmanship. Anything that is not certified, cannot be claimed as bordado de Guimarães. Anything I’ve made in that style, can really only be said to be made in the style of Guimarães embroidery.

If we apply this to other forms of embroidery, does that sort of definition hold up? Can only embroidery made in the place of origin, by the people of that place, in their traditional style, be said to be true examples of that embroidery? Strictly speaking, I think yes.

However, if we look at Hardanger, it was taken from Norway to far flung places many, many years ago. And since then, the embroidery has changed. Contemporary Hardanger is very different than old-style Hardanger, which was the reason for me writing the book “Early-Style Hardanger” – to show people what it used to be like, and to reinvigorate interest in that traditional style embroidery. And yet, it remains Hardanger. There are certain elements that make it recognisably Hardanger embroidery.

So when is Hardanger not Hardanger any more? When is any traditional style of embroidery not that style any more? How far is too far? Where is the line?

I saw these photos of Cathinka’s this morning, and immediately thought, “Oooh, Cathinka! Is that Hardanger any more?” I’m not saying it is, and I’m not saying it isn’t – I’m just pondering!

Cathinka has started to remove the mesh of threads where the filling stitches are usually worked. When you look closely at it, she’s edged those cuts in the lacy edge, just like you might at the outside edges of a piece. Is having holes like this in the middle any different than cutting away at the edges? In other pieces, Cathinka has removed the klosters, having only needleweaving and filling stitches inside a lacy edge.

Are these works, arguably without some of their distinctly “Hardanger” elements still Hardanger?

These questions are something that I have pondered at length, because when I present styles of embroidery to the world in my books, there is an element of me making the pronouncement of, “THIS is this style of embroidery. Anything else is not.” I have to be extremely careful to show the embroidery style as accurately as I can, in order to not lead people astray.

I want the cultural custodians of those styles to be happy with what I have presented, and not think, “Well, she got that wrong, didn’t she?” (Actually, in all honesty, I’m quite sure I’ve misrepresented aspects of the embroideries in my books, but I don’t want the overriding impression to be that!)

I know that people WILL then take what they learn from my books and change it; personalise it. Sometimes this starts moving it away from what would be regarded as “the style”. It is inevitable that this will happen. So how far is too far, that it is not “the style” anymore? When does it stop being “the style”?

How long is a piece of string?

What do you think?