Somewhere in the movie "The King and I," Anna finds herself in a situation in which she says, "I do not know what to say." The King responds, "When one does not know what to say, that is the time to be silent."

It may be that many of us find ourselves in this position, despite your very clear and interesting presentation of this group of textiles?

I wonder whether it makes sense to ask questions about them that parallel some we grapple with in our more primary areas of weaving interest.

What qualities does it appear that collectors of these textiles especially value?

Is there much 19th century material and is it sought particularly? Are there preferred color pallettes and are synthetic dyes an issue? Is fineness prized? What aesthetic standards seem to be applied by collectors? How would one distinguish a "collectible" piece from one that might be seen as less worthy of such attention? Etc.

Regards,

R. John Howe

You raise some good questions. I actually expect rather little discussion on Laotian tribal textiles simply because there is so little known about them, and the people who do know are, for the most part, not the rug collectors.

I think they are very beautiful objects, and technically extraordinary if we apply the standards to which we are accustomed.

The fineness of the supplementary weft work exceeds anything we see in "soumak" from western and central Asia, and there is far more use of silk than in tribal weavings from our more familiar territories. The warp ikat in central Asian textiles is almost crude in comparison to the weft ikat used in Laotian textiles (and in southeast Asian textiles in general). This is being said by someone who likes central Asian ikat very much, I should emphasize.

The colors are not too different than those we see in central and western Asian textiles, but, of course, the silk gives them a luster that wool doesn't.

Age attribution seems not to be a problem for folks who know, but I have difficulty with it except when the obviously synthetic dyes rear their garish heads. I have one T'ai Daeng shawl (not shown here) that one dealer suggested was probably 19th century and ought to bring well over $5,000 (I bought it for $125, so this was sounding pretty attractive). I showed it to Mattie Belle Gittenger at the Textile Museum, who estimated the age at not more than 25 years. My purchase price was, I suspect, toward the low end of fair market value. The dyes are natural, apparently the thing that gave away the age is the fact that the warp and weft were both silk; in 19th century items the warp is cotton.

Discussion is welcome and desirable, of course; this is a discussion board. On the other hand, I believe that this may well be the first exposure many of our readers have had to T'ai textiles, and deciding whether they even like the things may be difficult for now. It took me awhile to learn to see beauty in tribal rugs.

Regards,

Steve Price

You wrote in part:

"...The warp ikat in Central Asian textiles is almost crude in comparison to the weft ikat used in Laotian textiles..."

Here is something it might be worth clarifying. I notice that you don't say "warp-faced" or "weft-faced." Are the usages "warp ikat" and and "weft ikat" short hands for the longer terms or are they something distinctive? A week back there was a weaver at a TM rug morning who seemed to distinguish "warp-faced" ikat from "warp ikat," but I never got clear about it.

Different subject: Your suggestion Central Asian ikats (which sometimes took 13 guilds to create) are relatively crude compared to Laotian ones is something that draws attention.

Regards,

R. John Howe

I was wondering whether anyone would notice my choice of words in comparing Central Asian with Southeast Asian ikats.

Ikat weaving basically means tie-dying the yarn before putting it on the loom. My understanding of the two main forms are that either the warps or the wefts are tie-dyed, the result being warp ikat or weft ikat, respectively. Central Asian chapans are warp ikats, southeast Asian textiles are weft ikats. There's also a region in India that where they make double ikat (warp and weft both tie-dyed; I mention this just to make the list complete).

There are lots of central Asian chapans listed at Cloudband, so anyone unfamiliar with them can take a look at what they are. To make a long story short, they typically have big, bold blocks of colors, with relatively little fine detail except for the "tails" or "stems" that project vertically from the major motifs.

Southeast Asians use weft ikat, and the very detailed figural images most familiar to collectors are those of Indonesia. The T'ai Daeng skirt in the Salon essay is an exceptional example, but even the more ordinary pieces show levels of detail and sophistication that far exceed what is seen in central Asia. Remember, too, that in warp ikat the warps are set on the loom and before inserting any wefts, the weaver can adjust the warps to make the colors line up the way she wants them to. No such convenience exists in weft ikat work.

This is usually the point at which somebody like Marla pops in to tell the world that I'm using the words all wrong, and straightens everything out. This is how I learn.

Steve Price

So the terms "warp ikat" and "weft ikat" refer to what is wrapped in the dyeing process.

Since the dying is presumably usually done with the intent to make the designs or patterns to be seen, it would seem logical that most usually "weft ikat" is also a "weft-faced" fabric when woven and that "warp ikat" is usually a "warped faced" fabric.

But it would be possible for there to be variations in this regard and I wonder if you can see any in these pieces.

One possibility is that the weaver might want bands in which the resist dyed portions are entirely hidden by sections of solid color (whatever color the unwrapped warps or wefts are).

But it might get more complicated, with the weaver weaving areas in with the untied warps and wefts are partially visible and the tied and resist dyed portions would be too, a visually complex balanced plain weave.

Something like this might be true for pieces you've described as both warp and weft ikat. It would seem that both are likely resist dyed because both are to be visible in the woven fabric.

What do you see?

Regards,

R. John Howe

You wrote, Since the dying is presumably usually done with the intent to make the designs or patterns to be seen, it would seem logical that most usually "weft ikat" is also a "weft-faced" fabric when woven and that "warp ikat" is usually a "warped faced" fabric. The logic is not illogical. Who would bother making tie-dyed wefts only to hide them in a warp faced fabric? And if someone did that, who would know? In Laotian tribal weft ikat, the textile is weft predominant; in central Asian warp ikat, the textile is warp predominant. In Indian double ikat, the textile is balanced.

You also state, It would seem that both (warp and weft) are likely resist dyed because both are to be visible in the woven fabric. Perhaps the previous paragraph clarifies this. If not, I don't think I understand your question.

Regards,

Steve Price

Since you are making a complete list, I believe double ikat is also well known and highly prized from certain villages on Bali, Indonesia.

I wonder whether you could comment on the Indian influence, if you see any, on the Laotian textiles you collect.

Thank you, Michael

Thanks for reminding me (and everyone else) that weaving double ikat is not resricted to India.

The T'ai tribal textiles seem not to have much overt Indian influence, perhaps reflecting the fact that these people are in fairly remote areas (although physical geography doesn't generally present impassible barriers for design diffusion). The Khmer (Cambodia) and Siamese textiles, which I hope will be the subject of a future Salon, show very pronounced influence of Indian weavings.

The insularity of the textile art of the Laotian T'ai tribes is quite striking. The use of tapestry weave, for instance, occurs only in the T'ai Hun. Of course, relative insularity of tribal groups (like the Turkmen) is not a new notion to rug collectors.

Regards,

Steve Price

Hi,

That's true, but most modern shawls are also made with a cotton warp. These shawls can take weeks to make and silk warp threads can break a little too easily during the time the fabric is on the loom. Weavers say cotton is better because the material is stronger.

Now you find some shawls made with 100% silk because foreign buyers are usually ignorant about the complexity of the weaving, but are very impressed that something is 100% silk.

The warp threads are usually finer than the weft threads so it can be difficult to pick out the material.

- John

---

Steve Price (01-30-2001 06:30 a.m.):

Southeast Asians use weft ikat, and the very detailed figural images most familiar to collectors are those of Indonesia.

---

Hi,

I think you are referring to Sumbanese textiles. Those were traditionally made in warp ikat. Weft ikat was traditionally used in Bali and I think some Balinese are making weft ikat copies of Sumbanese designs.

In mainland Southeast Asia the Thais and Khmer use weft ikat while some minority groups like the Karen use warp ikat.

- John