Hello Susan, and anyone else who ponders this question, Unless the piece in question is being worked as a reconstruction, I can think of no basic reason why a Milanese braid should be worked using a rigid set of rules. Of course there are defining characteristics which enable us to categorise a style of lace, but these characteristics are simply a tool with which to do this. In the past, the number of pairs and the techniques used to create the piece in a Milanese style were chosen to suit the end result. Nothing has changed. I design pieces which often tend to the Milanese style and use Milanese braids, where the style suits the piece, but I also add and throw out pairs in pattern constantly, to describe the form, be it a fish, a bird, a shell, a twig of a stem of straight bamboo. If working in a purely graphic manner, rather than a naturalistic one, why should it be different? The design will either work as a good one, or it won't. A weedy braid will just look weedy, unless more pairs are added or the design is changed. With too many pairs, the braid will be cramped or unworkable. Why shouldn't a braid pattern follow the complete path of a section, whether it narrows, widens or travels around a tight curve? These days we are not (metaphorically) chained to our pillows, thankfully, so we are free to add and throw out pairs without redress to anything other than the end result of the lace itself. Pairs can be added to the existing braid pattern working pairs, in addition to the side space passive pairs that may or may not be bordering them. To see many examples of all this in action, you might like to visit my website: www.sandiwoods.com Susan, I'm looking forward to seeing you in my class at Sweet Briar in June! Sandi
- 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/
