Dear spiders, I'm not sure where I fall in this debate but I have a couple of observations to offer. They may be food for thought, or they may deserve to be ignored--I hope the former. I wonder if 'maths' is the right term or not. Just for some context, let me note that I like precision and 'correctness' but I prefer to make floral varieties of lace and have been told by one author and teacher that I am a natural at Binche. I always scored very high on the math section of standardized tests (99th percentile) but have never liked math or felt any good at it. I can add and divide and all that but am much more reliable with a calculator, and I was not any good at calculus. What I am, however, is a software engineer and I love designing and coding software programs. The observations I offer are: 1) there is no addition etc. form of maths in software development. Instead there is logical thinking and being able to analyze the sequence of actions necessary to produce the desired result. This is a type of 'maths' that seems to me necessary to do bobbin lace at all, regardless of the creativity side of it. 2) My second observation is very subjective, but one I have found fascinating. When I do a complicated bit of bobbin lace, it FEELS in my head the same as when I'm doing software design and coding. I get the same positive feeling FROM doing both bobbin lace and software development, yes, but more than that: it feels the same WHEN I'm doing it, like I'm doing basically the same thing. Like I said--subjective! Because of these two observations, I've always thought that people who are good at bobbin lace would make good software engineers, whether they know it or not, and whether they are good at arithmetic or not. This is the other way around from some of the observations that have been made, but related I think. I believe that the same analytical and logical skills are required in both, and also creativity to think of novel and more effective ways to do something. So maybe both 'sides' in this debate are right but talking past each other? Just a suggestion. Nancy from Connecticut, USA, but currently in Bruges, Belgium :-) with an appointment to see some old Binche lace in the museums' collections tomorrow and to photograph lace from a private collection this afternoon :-))
>________________________________ > From: Maureen <maur...@roger.karoo.co.uk> >To: "<alexstillw...@talktalk.net>" <alexstillw...@talktalk.net> >Cc: Arachne reply <lace@arachne.com>; Clay Blackwell <clayblackw...@comcast.net> >Sent: Sunday, July 7, 2013 3:18 PM >Subject: Re: [lace] Lace and maths > >Hi all > >As a non mathematical person I feel I must comment from those of us who are mathematically challenged. I like to think I am a reasonable lacemaker, I can draw out patterns on graph paper and use a lace design programme and I teach students how to draw out patterns to help understand the working of lace. But I cannot add up for toffee and some maths completely confuses me. I admit I am better with floral type laces, Bucks, Honiton etc but I don't like to make mistakes and teach accordingly. Please give consideration to non mathematical Lacemakers as well. There is a place for us all. > >Regards Maureen - To unsubscribe send email to majord...@arachne.com containing the line: unsubscribe lace y...@address.here. For help, write to arachne.modera...@gmail.com. Photo site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lacemaker/sets/
