It was a rather fraught day. Fair Isle knitting does not consort well with constant interruption. Still, I got another border pattern done. I don’t care for it much. You’ll see, soon.
All this talk of the J&S-Shetland-Museum sweater – the one you knit, MaureeninFargo, although I hadn’t grasped that until today – has made me wonder whether I should try to see what can be made of that, using my colours. I’m pretty sure it would be easy to chart it, using the illustration in Mucklestone’s book and the ones posted by Maureen and the one other Raveller who has attempted it.
I think maybe that will be the next experiment for my swatch-scarf. Only one lozenge-pattern per row, of course, and perhaps even a different peerie.
There’s a passage in Meg’s introduction to her Fair Isle cardigan in “Knitting” which baffles me. Maybe you can help. She is writing about the problem of what to do with a Fair Isle, knit bottom-up, when you get to the armholes. Work back and forth, which will involve purling? Or steek, and go on knitting in the round? Both solutions are found on Shetland, she says.
Then this: “Designers Lizbeth Upitis and Joyce Williams knit forwards and backwards from the underarm up – no steeks, no cutting, no purling back in pattern.”
What does that mean? The only Third Way I can think of is to cut the yarn at the end of every row and push everything back to the other end of the needle. That is indeed possible, but I wouldn’t describe it as “knitting forwards and backwards”.
Here’s my husband’s Tannehill, dark line and all:
In my wanderings last night, I wound up on Jimmy Bean’s madtosh DK page. I haven’t been there for quite a while. A great many of the colours were unfamiliar, and goodness! how wonderful! No wonder Tannehill went under, if they bring out new colours at that rate. It occurred to me to wonder whether the pattern for my leftovers, perhaps supplemented by one or two skeins of new-and-wonderful colours, might be this, which you’ve seen before:
It is written for 4-ply (sport weight, that would be, I think, more or less) in one size only. But it might not even have to be converted, as that one size is distinctly petite. Maybe in DK, it would come out about right. If conversion is necessary, I don’t think it would be too difficult.
Now I must go and put the clocks forward, and put some cider on ice for tomorrow….