Rowan Felted Tweed… what’s not to love? Marika got a ball of this luscious purple, Bilberry, at Christmas with an IOU. I was thinking I’d whip her up some pretty fingerless gloves, but she thought what she’d really like was a sweater, and since I love Marika and I love Felted Tweed, I quickly assented. She picked out Kim Hargreaves’s Emily, a design I’d been admiring myself. And I haven’t knit a Kim Hargreaves pattern since I finished Charlotte, found the size medium was enormous on me, and gave it to my mother-in-law. Since then I’ve become a devotee of Elizabeth Zimmermann and other proponents of seamless knitting in the round. I mean, why be bound by the conventions of the garment industry when your materials can take you beyond producing separate bits of shaped fabric and sewing them together, and often let you try your sweater on as you go to see if it fits as you wish? But I don’t loathe seaming. Joining clean stockinet edges is actually sort of fun. So while I could adapt this pattern to work in the round, I decided to knit it just as Kim intended. I haven’t had a good seaming party in a long time, and there’s a jar of a friend’s homemade kahlua in the kitchen that ought to suit the occasion.
And now that I’ve liberated my #7 needle from Amanda’s endless shawl collar, I’ve already sailed through the hem of the front. At this rate I’ll be ready for my seaming party in no time. I noticed a funny thing about the sleeves: Kim has you cast on a terrific number of stitches and work up from the full blousey width to the sleeve cap, then pick up along the cast-on row, decrease, and then knit the cuff down. Why, Kim? I posed the question to two friends yesterday, and they were clever enough to point out that it might affect the structure and stability of the cuff. It made perfect sense to me — who among us hasn’t learned the hard way that there’s a reason designers tell you to bind off stitches at the neckline before picking up for the collar? I have several sweaters, including my Blue Thistle jacket, that want stabilizing with a chain of crochet around the shoulders because I tossed this advice aside and left the stitches live for the collar. But now I think more about it, Kim’s reasoning for the Emily sleeves can’t be the same, or else she’d have you cast on the smaller number of stitches at the top of the cuff and then increase in the next row.
Pardon the unblocked state of this hem, but the sleeve cuff looks basically just like this, as far as I can tell from the picture. The directions are more or less reversed since you’re working it from the top down. So can any of you think of a decent reason not to just cast on the stitches for the cuff, work upward following the body hem instructions, and then increase for the bloused sleeve? Is this pattern an example of Unnecessary English Fiddlyness, or Superior English Construction? After all, this is the garment culture that brings us Savile Row bespoke suits, the Gansey, and a healthy slice of our general knitting heritage, including Elizabeth Zimmermann herself. I know better than to toss such a curious set of instructions aside without forethought. Make your arguments, ladies and gentlemen! It shouldn’t take me more than a week to finish the front and then I’ll have to take the decision.
And yes, that’s a truly colossal pine cone on my dining room table, in case the scale of that first picture was messing with anyone’s head.