- Home
- Textiles, Carpets and Tapestries
- Carpets
- Repairs and Fakes - A Smooth Transition....
KÖK
Memduh Kürtül and Michael Bischof are the owners of KÖK that deals in natural dies. From 1992 till the end of 1994 KÖK was funded by the German governmental development aid organization GZT/CIM.
KÖK
Fevzi Çakmak Mah.
Yeni Matbacilar Sit.
Yayın Cad. no:76
Konya
Turkey
Memduh Kürtül : +90-535-6876116
Michael Bischof: +49-6734-6713
by Michael Bischof and Memduh Kürtül
The most suitable method for repairing damaged textiles depends very much on the reason for repairing it. Is the textile a work of art, or of a relatively high level of home decoration? We believe that these are opposed to each other. The second includes much more than 90% of the trade, including the market for so called collectors pieces.
Textile Art
A piece of art has its own weight and dignity; both should be respected. What is necessary to include a weaving in the "textile art" category? Obviously, we cannot present more than some stimulus type of arguments here.
Often we hear the assertion that a certain piece should be regarded as "important". What makes it important ? Then, more often than not, all one can get is elegant art dealers argot. Things cannot be expressed in clear language with arguments that can be cross-checked are things that one does not know. It is that simple - in science. For example: "If we look at the subtle rendering of this [you name it] motif we feel tempted to suggest that it was part of a language. The fact I could not find anything else in a book that claimed to include the 10 most important existing flatweaves, prevented me (Michael Bischof) from doing a serious critical review of that publication or acknowledging any importance to these kilims. They most likely have some but this still has to be shown - but by another author. Arguments and evidence cannot be replaced by insistence on imparting an "aura" to the object.
The key questions seem to be to determine the intention of the artist within her (usually, in the case of oriental textiles) socio-cultural context. One must keep in mind that these intentions almost never communicated in spoken language, not even by contemporary weavers, and that this art is not anonymous. Anyone who has visited weavers in their context knows that. Without such knowledge it is impossible to find firm ground for building up measures for this art .
Safeguarding Interpretations - Knowing the Origin
To start with: one must define the subject. The beginning of western interest in oriental weaves was a general interest in using them, not viewing them as textile art. The descriptions were technical. When all kilims, including Iranian, were called "Karamanie" by our grandmothers, it was because it made sense for them and was not incorrect labeling. Prices were very high until World War I; these weavings were too expensive for the lower middle class. Even the upper middle class could buy only one or two of them in a generation. The amount of labor incorporated in them was high and oriental labor was not cheap (1).
The majority of pieces came to the west after shocking turbulences in the oriental countries and Russia early in the 20th century when people sold off what they had, very cheaply. Lately a similar situation arose when western dealers stormed to Peshawar to pick up what the Afghan refugees had taken out.
As a matter of perspective, imagine it from the standpoint of an Afghani. The first wave, the hippies, came for cheap hashish, the second wave for cheap weavings. In both cases it was cheap when at the source. The real origin of such pieces is lost, in most cases forever. Keep in mind that the Near East is a multi-ethnic region. Unlike Denmark (for example) where every village is populated by Danish people. In the Near East the villages look more or less the same. They change with geographical conditions (steppe, desert, mountain, wet-humid climates) but unlike Europe, not with the ethnicity of the inhabitants. The textiles that we deal with are part of a tradition that is bound to groups. In order to discuss them within the context of arts we must first identify them properly. Otherwise, any "analysis" will drown in empty speculation. Keep in mind how little serious field work is done in this area. What can occasional short trips of experts to these areas do beyond a bit of photographing and sampling? Where are the Turkmen specialists that speak the language and lived there for some time? If they exist, why don't they appear in our circles or publish in our forums? The pieces that came into the west after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and all the Iranian and Turkish material that was collected after ca. 1970 is not "anonymous" - it is "artifically anonymized". That we do not know their real origin is a man-made artefact - but it would not be impossible to correct this situation by suitable methods. We have proven this recently several times.
So when even the primary step in treating the textile as a piece of art is such a headache, anything that will unavoidably further change the object from its original status must be properly documented. Washing is unavoidable, repairing might be.
Damages
When a weaving is first used, there is a period of improvement. The fine surplus hairs that make the drawing less clear are rubbed off. With use, it slowly acquires its final shape. Nobody would run on it with shoes, which cause mechanical damage. Instead, bare feet or socks were used. This greatly improved the lustre of the yarn and dyes. The process cannot be replaced by chemical or mechanical treatments - these are all detractive.
The biggest factor is light. Photons oxidize (damage) the wool proteins and, of course, the dyes. The oxidation products of wool are yellowish-grey, and loss of color depth for the dyes. These oxidation products are water-soluble and invisible. This results in extra headaches for washing. In addition, textiles take up dirt. The mineral composition of soils in the Near East include a large amount of a kind of dust rich in iron-III compounds. Therefore, oriental textiles generate an orange-brown washing fluid.
Whatever happens - all usage except smoothing by feet or socks is damage and moves the piece away from the original artistic intention of the weavers. A patinated 60 year old piece is not what she had in mind when sitting at the loom. So, thinking in the frame of textile art (as opposite to collector habits) this is, artistically, a deviation. The are object gets damaged. Perfectly kept dowry pieces without any sign of light oxidation are the most difficult textile objects to sell. Simply stated, the number of customers who are qualified to recognize the age in spite of the perfect condition is too small to create a division in the market between textile art and home decoration textiles. Therefore, the bulk of wonderful dowry pieces that flooded into Turkey from the Caucasus and Central Asia after 1989 was a big economic flop. The market preferred the second class item, for example late, pale bags and carpets to which it was accustomed.
Restoration of an Important Kilim
The most impressive kilim exhibition I have seen in more than 20 years took place last year in the art center, Zeche Zollverein, in Essen. It was distinguished by the unusually high number of A-pieces (2) and the presence of a clear concept enabling the pieces to perform a kind of dialogue with three dimensional steel sculptures that switched into a two-dimensional appearance at a certain angle of viewing, opposite to certain kilims that arose into three dimensions by a proper arrangement of designs and colours. It was not the normal ego-blasting type of exhibitions, like "The latest purchases of Mr. Miller", and Dietmar Pelz, who appeared as spiritus rector of the event, did not refrain from inviting top pieces of other collectors to enlighten this event. A handy catalogue, which also shows the enormous space in this Bauhaus architecture, is still available at a reasonable cost (3).
In this catalogue one kilim of extreme importance is published (p. 86, 87, 88). It appeared in 1993 as a ghostly fragment. The picker is known, so its real origin in the eastern part of Central Anatolia can be traced (4). A number of pieces (all fragments) that resemble this one in certain details are known, but no piece or picture of such a piece came up that would enable us to call it a group.
The thick "outlining" of motifs with white and brown is a common feature in kilims (compare the kilims 10 and 12 in the same book: different colors were used) of this area. If this can be confirmed by proper field research it might be a characteristic of the group. But in this particular kilim the weaver has chosen to use a black (5) ground color, a creative decision that brings this piece to a new high aesthetic level. It is obvious when compared to kilim 12 in the same book. A minor secondary decoration element evolved into the main picture, demonstrating the underlying design scheme with a clarity unknown from early kilims of the same period (we guess this to be around 1800). To find traces of individual creative decisions that weavers took is not difficult. But we do not know of any parallel event where such a challenge was met with a comparably tantalizing effect. For this reason, this particular kilim is one of the most important flatweaves that I (Michael Bishof) know. All that we just mentioned was not visible in the fragment at all. The black yarn was corroded to such an extent that the white warps visible that the picture of this kilim were nearly invisible. Perhaps there are a few connoissers worldwide who can visualize the original picture by educated selective perception, ignoring the disturbing white warps.
Washing the fragment (6) was no problem. The biggest trouble comes when the piece is immersed into pure water for the first time. All the univisible oxidation damages made the dye lakes partially water-so-luble. This part would be lost forever unless the oxidation is repaired first, the dye lakes are fixed again - and then any kind of detergent might be applied, just opposite to what is commonly done. To secure it by mounting on linen fabric (the second best solution: suitable woollen handwoven fabric would be better) would have been no problem. Keep in mind that interpretation of the piece begins with the the details of how it is mounted (7).
But would it have helped? The picture, the message of the kilim, would not come back by doing it. After lengthy discussions with the present owner it was decided that after a careful wash (and documenting its details) it would be better to replace the corroded black yarns with specially prepared hand-spun yarn dyed expertedly in the same nuance applying all what we had learned on how this particular shade has been made in ancient times. To dismiss any possible later smell of "cheating" both sides agreed on first documenting the original condition of the piece and before starting the repair. Newly dyed new yarns were applied. This nuance is not available from kilim debris of similar age - the yarns are as corroded, unelastic, broken as they were in this piece. The aim of the repair was just to recover the picture, not to close each tiny hole and generate an artificial "German condition". The material essence of the piece is changed by this repair: the new yarns are much finer than the original ones. Keep in mind that a kilim of that age and use has no more than about 50% of its orignal fiber (and weight). Yarns that are worn look much finer. But, hopefully, the visual essence of the piece is been recovered. It can be discussed later because all details about the extent to which the original was changed are known. Nobody is left in the fog!
Those readers who have not acquired the catalogue will see the result here in about a week (8).
Different Goals with Home Textiles
For home textile decorative pieces things are different. If it cost $5,000 and it looks like $5,000, and the owner likes the way it looks, nothing remains unsolved. The look is important, the rest secondary. The owner, who will be surrounded with such textiles, has the right to adjust the look to his preferences.
In such cases nobody should pretend, now or later, to achieve textile art levels. Virginity is a status that ends without a return ticket. There is nothing wrong with fine-tuning weaves so that their appearance is according to the owners taste. Most oriental weavings were, when woven, commercial products of an existing authentic textile culture, using this culture as design inspiration and technical safeguard for producing bread-and-butter items. Nearly all Caucasian rugs of the second half of the 19th century are like this, most Turkmen on today's markets, a substantial portion of Turkish and Iranian rugs as well. The "old technology" in the sense of Neugebauer and Orende, was simply resulting in rugs that were technically superior to their later followers, when technology improved on the expense of quality. Even today any trained eye can confirm this simple fact. But there is no integrity that must be respected with such weaves, they have no cultural value at all, so they can be used (and fine tuned) according to the wishes of their owners.
Textile Art
A piece of art has its own weight and dignity; both should be respected. What is necessary to include a weaving in the "textile art" category? Obviously, we cannot present more than some stimulus type of arguments here.
Often we hear the assertion that a certain piece should be regarded as "important". What makes it important ? Then, more often than not, all one can get is elegant art dealers argot. Things cannot be expressed in clear language with arguments that can be cross-checked are things that one does not know. It is that simple - in science. For example: "If we look at the subtle rendering of this [you name it] motif we feel tempted to suggest that it was part of a language. The fact I could not find anything else in a book that claimed to include the 10 most important existing flatweaves, prevented me (Michael Bischof) from doing a serious critical review of that publication or acknowledging any importance to these kilims. They most likely have some but this still has to be shown - but by another author. Arguments and evidence cannot be replaced by insistence on imparting an "aura" to the object.
The key questions seem to be to determine the intention of the artist within her (usually, in the case of oriental textiles) socio-cultural context. One must keep in mind that these intentions almost never communicated in spoken language, not even by contemporary weavers, and that this art is not anonymous. Anyone who has visited weavers in their context knows that. Without such knowledge it is impossible to find firm ground for building up measures for this art .
Safeguarding Interpretations - Knowing the Origin
To start with: one must define the subject. The beginning of western interest in oriental weaves was a general interest in using them, not viewing them as textile art. The descriptions were technical. When all kilims, including Iranian, were called "Karamanie" by our grandmothers, it was because it made sense for them and was not incorrect labeling. Prices were very high until World War I; these weavings were too expensive for the lower middle class. Even the upper middle class could buy only one or two of them in a generation. The amount of labor incorporated in them was high and oriental labor was not cheap (1).
The majority of pieces came to the west after shocking turbulences in the oriental countries and Russia early in the 20th century when people sold off what they had, very cheaply. Lately a similar situation arose when western dealers stormed to Peshawar to pick up what the Afghan refugees had taken out.
As a matter of perspective, imagine it from the standpoint of an Afghani. The first wave, the hippies, came for cheap hashish, the second wave for cheap weavings. In both cases it was cheap when at the source. The real origin of such pieces is lost, in most cases forever. Keep in mind that the Near East is a multi-ethnic region. Unlike Denmark (for example) where every village is populated by Danish people. In the Near East the villages look more or less the same. They change with geographical conditions (steppe, desert, mountain, wet-humid climates) but unlike Europe, not with the ethnicity of the inhabitants. The textiles that we deal with are part of a tradition that is bound to groups. In order to discuss them within the context of arts we must first identify them properly. Otherwise, any "analysis" will drown in empty speculation. Keep in mind how little serious field work is done in this area. What can occasional short trips of experts to these areas do beyond a bit of photographing and sampling? Where are the Turkmen specialists that speak the language and lived there for some time? If they exist, why don't they appear in our circles or publish in our forums? The pieces that came into the west after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and all the Iranian and Turkish material that was collected after ca. 1970 is not "anonymous" - it is "artifically anonymized". That we do not know their real origin is a man-made artefact - but it would not be impossible to correct this situation by suitable methods. We have proven this recently several times.
So when even the primary step in treating the textile as a piece of art is such a headache, anything that will unavoidably further change the object from its original status must be properly documented. Washing is unavoidable, repairing might be.
Damages
When a weaving is first used, there is a period of improvement. The fine surplus hairs that make the drawing less clear are rubbed off. With use, it slowly acquires its final shape. Nobody would run on it with shoes, which cause mechanical damage. Instead, bare feet or socks were used. This greatly improved the lustre of the yarn and dyes. The process cannot be replaced by chemical or mechanical treatments - these are all detractive.
The biggest factor is light. Photons oxidize (damage) the wool proteins and, of course, the dyes. The oxidation products of wool are yellowish-grey, and loss of color depth for the dyes. These oxidation products are water-soluble and invisible. This results in extra headaches for washing. In addition, textiles take up dirt. The mineral composition of soils in the Near East include a large amount of a kind of dust rich in iron-III compounds. Therefore, oriental textiles generate an orange-brown washing fluid.
Whatever happens - all usage except smoothing by feet or socks is damage and moves the piece away from the original artistic intention of the weavers. A patinated 60 year old piece is not what she had in mind when sitting at the loom. So, thinking in the frame of textile art (as opposite to collector habits) this is, artistically, a deviation. The are object gets damaged. Perfectly kept dowry pieces without any sign of light oxidation are the most difficult textile objects to sell. Simply stated, the number of customers who are qualified to recognize the age in spite of the perfect condition is too small to create a division in the market between textile art and home decoration textiles. Therefore, the bulk of wonderful dowry pieces that flooded into Turkey from the Caucasus and Central Asia after 1989 was a big economic flop. The market preferred the second class item, for example late, pale bags and carpets to which it was accustomed.
Restoration of an Important Kilim
The most impressive kilim exhibition I have seen in more than 20 years took place last year in the art center, Zeche Zollverein, in Essen. It was distinguished by the unusually high number of A-pieces (2) and the presence of a clear concept enabling the pieces to perform a kind of dialogue with three dimensional steel sculptures that switched into a two-dimensional appearance at a certain angle of viewing, opposite to certain kilims that arose into three dimensions by a proper arrangement of designs and colours. It was not the normal ego-blasting type of exhibitions, like "The latest purchases of Mr. Miller", and Dietmar Pelz, who appeared as spiritus rector of the event, did not refrain from inviting top pieces of other collectors to enlighten this event. A handy catalogue, which also shows the enormous space in this Bauhaus architecture, is still available at a reasonable cost (3).
In this catalogue one kilim of extreme importance is published (p. 86, 87, 88). It appeared in 1993 as a ghostly fragment. The picker is known, so its real origin in the eastern part of Central Anatolia can be traced (4). A number of pieces (all fragments) that resemble this one in certain details are known, but no piece or picture of such a piece came up that would enable us to call it a group.
The thick "outlining" of motifs with white and brown is a common feature in kilims (compare the kilims 10 and 12 in the same book: different colors were used) of this area. If this can be confirmed by proper field research it might be a characteristic of the group. But in this particular kilim the weaver has chosen to use a black (5) ground color, a creative decision that brings this piece to a new high aesthetic level. It is obvious when compared to kilim 12 in the same book. A minor secondary decoration element evolved into the main picture, demonstrating the underlying design scheme with a clarity unknown from early kilims of the same period (we guess this to be around 1800). To find traces of individual creative decisions that weavers took is not difficult. But we do not know of any parallel event where such a challenge was met with a comparably tantalizing effect. For this reason, this particular kilim is one of the most important flatweaves that I (Michael Bishof) know. All that we just mentioned was not visible in the fragment at all. The black yarn was corroded to such an extent that the white warps visible that the picture of this kilim were nearly invisible. Perhaps there are a few connoissers worldwide who can visualize the original picture by educated selective perception, ignoring the disturbing white warps.
Washing the fragment (6) was no problem. The biggest trouble comes when the piece is immersed into pure water for the first time. All the univisible oxidation damages made the dye lakes partially water-so-luble. This part would be lost forever unless the oxidation is repaired first, the dye lakes are fixed again - and then any kind of detergent might be applied, just opposite to what is commonly done. To secure it by mounting on linen fabric (the second best solution: suitable woollen handwoven fabric would be better) would have been no problem. Keep in mind that interpretation of the piece begins with the the details of how it is mounted (7).
But would it have helped? The picture, the message of the kilim, would not come back by doing it. After lengthy discussions with the present owner it was decided that after a careful wash (and documenting its details) it would be better to replace the corroded black yarns with specially prepared hand-spun yarn dyed expertedly in the same nuance applying all what we had learned on how this particular shade has been made in ancient times. To dismiss any possible later smell of "cheating" both sides agreed on first documenting the original condition of the piece and before starting the repair. Newly dyed new yarns were applied. This nuance is not available from kilim debris of similar age - the yarns are as corroded, unelastic, broken as they were in this piece. The aim of the repair was just to recover the picture, not to close each tiny hole and generate an artificial "German condition". The material essence of the piece is changed by this repair: the new yarns are much finer than the original ones. Keep in mind that a kilim of that age and use has no more than about 50% of its orignal fiber (and weight). Yarns that are worn look much finer. But, hopefully, the visual essence of the piece is been recovered. It can be discussed later because all details about the extent to which the original was changed are known. Nobody is left in the fog!
Those readers who have not acquired the catalogue will see the result here in about a week (8).
Different Goals with Home Textiles
For home textile decorative pieces things are different. If it cost $5,000 and it looks like $5,000, and the owner likes the way it looks, nothing remains unsolved. The look is important, the rest secondary. The owner, who will be surrounded with such textiles, has the right to adjust the look to his preferences.
In such cases nobody should pretend, now or later, to achieve textile art levels. Virginity is a status that ends without a return ticket. There is nothing wrong with fine-tuning weaves so that their appearance is according to the owners taste. Most oriental weavings were, when woven, commercial products of an existing authentic textile culture, using this culture as design inspiration and technical safeguard for producing bread-and-butter items. Nearly all Caucasian rugs of the second half of the 19th century are like this, most Turkmen on today's markets, a substantial portion of Turkish and Iranian rugs as well. The "old technology" in the sense of Neugebauer and Orende, was simply resulting in rugs that were technically superior to their later followers, when technology improved on the expense of quality. Even today any trained eye can confirm this simple fact. But there is no integrity that must be respected with such weaves, they have no cultural value at all, so they can be used (and fine tuned) according to the wishes of their owners.