Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-03-29
THE DAILY CHIT-CHAT.
By Ruth Cameron.

us this handmade?' queried the shop
per, holding up a dainty little crocheted
slipper which she had been examining.
NO" said the honest clerk, its ma
chine done, but think it's very pretty,
don't your
But the shopper, instead of making any
reply, dropped the slipper as If she had
suddenly discovered that it was sprinkled
with Paris green or cholera microbes, and
walked on.
Do you know, 1 think a great many of
us carry this passion for handmade
things altogether too far.
What is it about handmade articles
that makes them so much more to. be
desired?
Is 1t their superior appearance? How
can 1t always be? The shopper couldn't
tell by the most careful examination
whether the slipper was handmade or
not. She had to ask the clerk
To be sure. some articles can pick
out at once as handmade, but with many
more We have to ask the clerk before
we know. And great many times. l
fancy, we don't know even then. Be
sides, some things look better when ma
chine-made than they do when done by
hand. Yes, 1 dare say it. In the old
days, when handwork was done with the
most painstaking manner, 1T was beauti-
Iul bul tOuds, "iltli TIC HdHd WI C1,
like all the rest of us, is infected with
the hurry mania, and is obliged, more
over, to compete with machine products,
handwork Is not what 1t used to be.
Machines. on the other hand. are daily
being brought nearer perfection, and do
finer and more accurate work than they
used to.
Probably many people think they prefer
handwork because it is more durable.
Perhaps that is true about some things,
huf I fancy that in the Diff
ference is so slight as to be really unm-
portant. To refer to the olden times
again. II the work were done in the for
eternity fashion of our grandparents
It's done by workers of today in the
"get-it done somehow fashion that
speeding. whether of man or machine,
invariably produces. We think we are
bility of our grandfathers' days by in
sisting on handwork, but we aren't. The
difference is deeper than that.
1t seems to me that our affection for
durability or beauty as on it's rarity and
greater expense. We like handwork be-
cause it costs more, because everybody
cannot have it and because we think 1t
distinguishes us from the masses. Ny
mother tells me that when machines were
first used, and machine work was rarer
than handwork, just the opposite condf-
| ton existed. The people who could af-
ford to have what they wanted mad ma
chine work. delighted In 1t and showed
il off to their friends. Then machine
work became so common that every one
could have 1t, and handwork became ex-
pensive. And now those who want some
thing q little better than other folks
must have handwork. Doesn't that prove
pretty conclusively that the desire for
exclusiveness, for having something that's
hard to get, Is at least one component
of our love for handwork?
The vast amount of time spent in the
home in doing things by hand is another
phase Of this matter. The sewing ma
chine is a wonderful invention, which
stands ready to give every mother more
time for self-cultivation. for companion
ship with her children and for a hundred
other worth while things. Is she not
making q mistake when she turns her
back upon 1t and spends long hours
doing by hand what could be done in a
few minutes on the machine, just because
''handWOrk is nicer?