old question

minnow at belfry.org.uk minnow at belfry.org.uk
Fri Dec 19 12:05:49 EST 2003


Charlie wrote:
>> Philip.
>> > Oh well.  I must have assumed that, since they made tapestries, they
>> must have been weavers.
>I suppose these were 'tapestries' in the sense that the Bayeux tapestry is.
>Or isn't.

Wasn't it a tapestry that Penelope wove and unwove for several years? So
they do be woven artifacts too loike, m'dear...  I don't know that there
is a word for "enormous great scenes done in cloth and stitchery" apart
from "tapestries", because somehow "embroideries" doesn't feel as if it
ought to come in chunks much larger than a cushion-cover.  As it were,
and with all deference to anyone on the list who happens to be working
on a sixty-four-foot-by-twelve embroidery for some reason.

What reason? Well, um, how about one side of an ornamental engine-cosy
for when the signals at Twyford have had a pneumatic drill put through
all the cables, and all the trains have to hang about outside Reading
and get cold and unhappy?  The other side of course would be patchwork,
and there would need to be a knitted top; it would be too difficult
to fit if it were entirely unelastic.

Minnow
--
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/



More information about the Dwj mailing list