Craft Guilds

“Circulation of Skilled Labor in Late Medieval and Early Modern Central Europe” Reinhold Reith

Reading Reith’s framing of the history of tramping (period of traveling journeymen of a craft undergo), guild structure, a sort of mapping of region and craft, and the circulation of tacit knowledge and technology left me feeling surprised that really, up until now, I was thinking of craftsmanship as locally fixed. We’ve read a little bit about the tensions between man and machine locally – that is within a craft or a craftsman with a craftsman body, and I suppose I wasn’t thinking beyond this local node, or between local nodes globally. It seems silly to recognize that certainly knowledge, even tacit knowledge, has influence from beyond the local in terms of technique, technology, and materials. Reith’s summarizes his historical gloss as follows:

  • guilds were omnipresent
  • it was difficult to prevent skilled labor from moving around (beyond local)
  • the impossibility of stopping skilled workers from moving had consequences for the diffusion of technology – skills and knowledge (interested in his definition of technology)

I’m particularly interested in the diffusion of technology. Reith explains

“highly mobile journeymen were a significant force of technological diffusion…[Whereas] forced migration [of masters] helped transfer technology across linguistic and national, although probably not religious boundaries, journeymen’s travels were mostly restricted to areas that were institutionally and culturally more homogeneous, and were thus instrumental in shaping technological pools. By contrast… ‘unfree’ highly regulated markets, and in particular the labor markets of the crafts, blocked the spread of innovations through journeyman tramping: no master was willing to disclose workshop secrets and innovations were unwelcome” (131)

Reith works to make this look at circulation more nuanced though, seeming to focus on illuminating that “forced” was actually more voluntary; journeymen traveled with the objective of gaining technical experience with the intention of returning (131). He explains, with examples in different crafts, that “The recruitment and enticement of desirable specialists occurred across territorial and linguistic barriers in every sector” (133); journeymen traveled to cooperate with large numbers of masters (men and women), other journeymen and apprentices; learned about regional differences in work organisation; and came to recognise different practices, raw materials, and products in their journey. Reith notes that there was potential for failure in this traveling, or migration due to technical, economic, social, cultural, and religious reasons (even to the extent that some journeymen could not return). Reith describes the diffusion of technology in these journeymen’s travels as taking the form of radiation, acquisition through imitation (“imperceptible”) and by migration (“spectacular”) sometimes coercion (132). Reith describes that patterns of mobility varied from trade to trade, but late medieval and early modern skilled workers were highly mobile (141) with the emphasis on acquiring technology to improve craft. But, some crafts were closed to diffusion; not permitting migration of journeymen in or out of a guild resulted from attempting to protect the primacy in a craft; however, in working to conceal what is being made from outside craftsmen, the making cannot be influenced by outside craftsmen  – no new techniques.

I’m interested in the diffusion of technology in terms of technique in the circulation of journeymen and its relationship to tools and its relationship with technological advancement and machinery. I also found myself wanting visualizations of “primary” or “origin” crafts and their form/technique/materials over time/space as influenced by diffusion – a leather glove had a certain type of stitching in France until a journeymen observed and developed the technique of stitching used in Switzerland for X reason – what does the glove look like then? A blend? Something different in the combination of elements? I’d be curious to see this diffusion (and traces to place/people/technique would be really neat).

After reading, I was browsing the web for guilds and came across an exhibit on display at The Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History: “Mud Masons of Mali”. The exhibit is described on its page as “featuring photographs, original films, objects and tools, tell[ing] the stories of one of Africa’s most celebrated ancient architectural traditions, and it highlights the different challenges masons face today to hold on to their craft in the 21st century”. I thought that this might function as an example of diffusion. There are two short videos about the mason work from the perspectives of the masons, particularly their craftsmanship and their work on the Djenne Mosque – The Great Mosque. Each year, the community gathers for the application of a new layer of mud over the mosque. This is following the traditional technique and tools (much work depicted is done by the hand – hand as tool) of the Boso, described on the Smithsonian site as “a centuries-old craft guild that fosters and oversees the art of mud construction. Techniques and traditions are handed down between generations of masons as young laborers strive to become apprentices and, eventually, after years of perfecting their art, master masons.” The videos show the training and skills needed to build and maintain mud architecture, but illuminate the “contemporary political and environmental challenges mud masons encounter as they struggle to preserve their historic city in the face of modernization”. The Master Mason explains that the masons are striving to maintain traditional building styles while meeting the demand for bigger buildings with more conveniences – indoor plumbing, and painted and tiled portions to reduce upkeep of the mud (the process requires the entire community in part). I wonder where diffusion plays a role here in the desire for “contemporary” (to put it loosely) buildings. But a more striking example is told from the Master Mason in response to the restoration work done by UNESCO workers on the Mosque. In 1988 The Mosque was deemed a UNESCO World Heritage site – as a representation of one of the most impressive mudbrick buildings in the world (constructed in 1907). Internally, as described by the Master Mason, there were many hidden cracks that needed to be mended. But the work of the UNESCO workers, he describes as “European” – what does diffusion mean here? Although the materials (not certain of the tools) were the same as the Boso have used, the technique is different. As shown in the video, The Mosque goes from having more rounded shape as a result of applied and shaping mud by the palm, to having more rigid edges (a different technique and aesthetic – the building has changed). I wonder about the exchange of knowledge and technology between the UNESCO journeymen and the Guild of the Boso.

Advertisements

Screen Printing: Screen Status

After my last failed print with drawing fluid, I was hesitant to print again. With a meager budget, I was worried I destroyed my screen. To reiterate (condensed version): the screen filler in my last design would not wash out of my screen. I did not have any Speedball screen cleaner, and was trying to use household cleaners I did have that I read about on discussion boards – Greased Lightning, Mr. Clean, and dishwasher detergent. None of these cleaners seemed to have any impact, so returning to the boards, I read about some printers suggestion to use a power washer. Not owning a power washer in my city apartment (I don’t even have a hose), I took my screen to the touchless car wash late on a Sunday night (part of the reason I couldn’t purchase Speedball cleaner – the art store nor the craft store were open). Too many quarters later, my screen still wasn’t clean. While the power washer took off some of the screen filler, much remained. I had to wait a few days before I had money to purchase more Speedball cleaner; meanwhile the screen sat with the filler still in the mesh. Cleaning with the Speedball cleaner helped, but a ghost of the print remained. Since then I have been trying to find an answer for why the filler wouldn’t come out because I am following the written instructions. I suspect however that being able to talk to someone who has screen printed might provide me with what Richard Sennett calls “expressive instructions” – the tacit, embodied knowledge that language has a difficult time representing. I wonder, without a source of expressive instruction if:

  • Perhaps I have the wrong type of bristles in my brush (too hard? too soft?)
  • The temperature or pressure or amount of water I use to wash my screen isn’t the most effective
  • The pressure that I apply to scrub the screen isn’t right
  • The amount of time I let the screen cleaner sit isn’t long enough
  • The amount of time the screen filler stays on the screen is too long
  • The amount of cleaner I use is enough
  • The amount of screen filler I use is too much

And so on.

Where can I turn for expressive instruction? I’ve thought about approaching a faculty member from the studio arts program, but I don’t know what’s stopping me (those disciplinary boundaries?). This is probably a path that I should brave and venture. At a recent community event, I learned of a non-profit organization opening up called SALT Makerspace, a studio(s) space to share tools, collaborate, and learn from a community of craft. They’re just opening, but I have seen the skeleton of a screen printing workshop they’ll offer. But the workshops and using the space cost money per month that I don’t have. What I do feel like I have access to, even though I can’t direct my interaction with it specifically to me, is the web. I’ve read forums, watched YouTube videos, and looked at accounts of people’s processes. Either cleaning the screens isn’t addressed, it’s addressed with the instructions that come on the Speedball cleaner bottle, or it does show the process but it is for light emulsion printing, which I’m not doing. It doesn’t seem like I should be having problems, but I am. Moreso, I believe I have trashed the mesh of my screen. While I don’t know the effect that it will have on my prints, the mesh is stretched and warped in places. My next print will be simple until I am confident enough that future prints will not be too impacted by the screen distortion.