MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4362241991 · doi:10.1353/nhr.2022.0045

"Storying" Landscape and Material Practice: Clones Crochet Lacemaking as Irish Intangible Cultural Heritage

2022· article· en· W4362241991 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. E. Gillett

Notice bibliographique

RevueNew hibernia review · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIrishVisual artsIntangible cultural heritageHookClothingSociologyArtCultural heritageHistoryEngineeringArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

"Storying" Landscape and Material Practice:Clones Crochet Lacemaking as Irish Intangible Cultural Heritage Molly-Claire Gillett (bio) Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 1. Crocheting the diamond-pattern mesh ornamented with Clones knots to join crocheted motifs, constructing Clones crochet lace. Crochet and photograph by the author [End Page 36] ________ on august 4, 2020, Catherine Martin, the Irish Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, announced the addition of eight "Living Cultural Heritage" practices to Ireland's National Inventory of Intangible Cultural Heritage (INIICH). Martin's statement highlighted the importance of teaching, community building, and placemaking in selecting the practices for inclusion on the registry: "These eight living cultural heritage practices require knowledge and skill, and foster our sense of community and place. These practices thrive through the dedicated communities who sustain and pass on their skills and way of life to succeeding generations ensuring the continuance of these important traditions."1 One of the living cultural heritage practices added to the list was Clones Crochet Lace Making, which the inventory describes as "an Irish crochet lace characterized by use of a crochet hook with the motifs joined by a distinctive 'Clones Knot'—a ball made by turning the hook ten to twelve times around the thread" (Figure 1).2 Clones crochet lacemaking is a distinctive regional technique and tradition of Irish crochet, a fine crochet lace typically assembled from small motifs—such [End Page 37] as roses, shamrocks, and harps—joined together with chains of single crochet that create a diamond-shaped mesh. Introduced to the Clones, County Monaghan, area by a philanthropic clergyman's wife in the mid-nineteenth century, it provided small-scale employment opportunities for women of the region. It came under the supervision of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in the early years of the twentieth century, but lost its economic importance as a result of increasing mechanization, cheaper production elsewhere, and changing fashions after the First World War. However, families in Monaghan and the surrounding counties kept pieces of lace from their mothers, grandmothers, and aunts, and some women continued to make lace for gift giving and personal use. In the 1990s a group of Clones women drew inspiration from this living archive of skills and historic lace specimens to revive the techniques and designs of a century earlier and to begin teaching the craft to new makers. Máire Treanor, a member of this group who is still active in teaching, designing, researching, and making Clones lace, is listed in the INIICH as "an authority on Clones lace."3 This article documents Treanor's work as an educator, designer, and promoter of Clones crochet lace, framing the craft as an intangible cultural heritage practice and considering the ways in which it "fosters [a] sense of community and place." Drawing from my own experience designing and making lace under Treanor's tutelage, both in Ireland and online, from Canada, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I also consider the question of how learners engage with intangible cultural heritage from afar. If lived cultural practices "foster our sense of community and place," what does this look like when they become global phenomena? Can this function be maintained as skills are shared internationally on digital platforms? ________ The notion of intangible cultural heritage (henceforth, ICH) is a relatively new one in heritage discourse, emerging from a long history of attempts—primarily by Asian, African, and South American nations—to challenge the Eurocentric conception of heritage as being primarily material, or tangible.4 The 1972 World Heritage Convention of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) outlined a strategy to protect cultural and natural heritage, prioritizing the built environment and sites of natural beauty or ecological importance, but neglecting to consider safeguarding cultural practices or [End Page 38] more transient forms of material cultural expression.5 It was not until 2003 that UNESCO introduced the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, defining it as "the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills—as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith—that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,291
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,976

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0250,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,077
Tête enseignante GPT0,295
Écart entre enseignants0,218 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNew hibernia reviewMême sujetCultural Heritage Management and PreservationTravaux en français237 207